首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Recruitment Process Outsourcing—better known as RPO—has gained significant market momentum in recent years. Yet it has taken a w
Recruitment Process Outsourcing—better known as RPO—has gained significant market momentum in recent years. Yet it has taken a w
admin
2012-01-23
38
问题
Recruitment Process Outsourcing—better known as RPO—has gained significant market momentum in recent years. Yet it has taken a while. Given that employers have been seeking help in their recruiting efforts for decades, it seems odd that the rise of RPO as a service solution has taken so long. Isn’t outsourcing of non-core functions a widely accepted business strategy? Isn’t recruiting one of the largest line items for many organisations and not a core function?
Today, however, organisations that consider outsourcing their recruiting efforts can pore over and compare tangible outcomes seen by those successful early adopters of RPO. But tread lightly. There have been a number of very public RPO failures where results have fallen woefully short of expcetations, sending business leaders and the marketplace back into the boardroom to debate yet again the viability and sustainability of the solution. Can RPO be truly successful? If there are companies out there who are reaping the proposed benefits of outsourcing, what are they doing that others are not? The fact is there are common elements—let’s even call them tenets—that when followed, can greatly increase the effectiveness and ultimate outcomes of the RPO solution. Before we look at those tenets, however, it’s it’s important to understand the history of RPO.
Recruitment process outsourcing is the culmination of an evolutionary process that started with third-party recruiters engaged at the line manager level or as an adiunct to an organlsatlon’s internal staffing initiatives. Utilising the approach was simple: call your preferred recruiter(s) with a job description and expect screened candidates to be sent to you. Overall, this process continues to serve as a highly scalable option in many talent acquisition strategms, but it is extremely costly. Moreover, based on the transactional nature of the relationship, it comes with high risk and little accountability for results.
Companies soon realised they could bring the same talent in-house as contractors—their intentions clearly centered on achieving the same scalability but with reduced cost and greater control of the outcomes. In practice though, this model proved to be almost as expensive as high agency utilisation and surprisingly, with co-employment and other new issues, even more complex. Worse yet, the rates for contractors continued to climb as corporate recruiters began to seek out these new, more highly paid "nomad" positions instead of their corporate roles. The desired "direct sourcing" impact these recruiters were supposed to have never materialized as skills, and innovative approaches floundered without the access to best practices and innovative techniques that contingency recruiting agencies cultivated.
At the same time, traditional recruiting providers began to assume a more prominent role in assisting their customers with new ways to handle huge spikes in hiring. Although this represented a new challenge for both companies and providers, the solutions were primarily project-based and, therefore, rarely focused on achieving strategtc improvements.
Over time, the RPO paradigm changed to finally justify its title, while providers literally began assuming delivery of an organisation’s internal staffing function. This early model was fraught with mistiming because most organisations treated RPO solutions like earlier transactional recruiting solutions. In addition, most providers simply weren’t ready to deliver at the levels they had signed up for. As the burgeoning industry learns from itself, organisations have honed their approach to RPO vendor management and some providers have refined their solutions to near industry-standard levels.
Employers try hard to find talents by themselves to
选项
A、make recruitment a core department of their companies.
B、cut cost and guarantee better results.
C、ensure the effectiveness of the recruitment process.
D、come with little risk and high accountability for results.
答案
B
解析
文中第四段提到“Companies soon realised they could bring the same talent in-house as contractors—their intentions clearly centered on achieving the same scalability but with reduced cost and greater control of the outcomes”,即:公司很快意识到他们像承包商一样找到合适的人才—他们的用意当然是着重于达到相同的伸缩性,但是成本更低且更好对结果进行控制。而且选项中的cut cost与文中的reduced cost相对应,选项中的guarantee better results与文中的greater control of the outcomes相对应。所以,B项符合题意。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/so7d777K
本试题收录于:
BEC高级阅读题库BEC商务英语分类
0
BEC高级阅读
BEC商务英语
相关试题推荐
Whatdidthemandorecently?
Accordingtothespeaker,whatdidthemayorrecentlydo?
Accordingtothespeaker,whatdidthemayorrecentlydo?
Whattypeoffacilitywasrecentlybuilt?
Whattypeoffacilitywasrecentlybuilt?
Whywasthewomanbusyrecently?
Whywasthewomanbusyrecently?
随机试题
下列关于术前准备的叙述中,哪个不正确
对污染较重的伤口清创后暂不缝合,观察2~3天后如无明显感染,再缝合,这种缝合为
试述秦代诉讼制度中的诉讼程序、诉讼原则及诉讼制度对后世的影响。
甲因常去某洗浴中心而与业主叶某熟识。当甲知悉叶某在该洗浴中心还从事容留、介绍妇女卖淫活动后,就多次带本单位同事多人到该洗浴中心,让叶某介绍、安排像样的小姐“服务”。期间,甲均在一旁守候,并在事后询问他人给付叶某“台费”及卖淫女嫖资等情况。甲的行为:(
托收属于逆汇。()
下列各种环境中,属于政治法律环境的是()。
有8人要在某学术报告会上做报告.其中张和李希望被安排在前三个做报告,王希望最后一个做报告,赵不希望在前三个做报告,其余4人没有要求。如果安排做报告顺序时要满足所有人的要求,则共有多少种可能的报告序列?()
王太太带着孩子们参加了赴日旅游团,导游好奇地问他们家有几个孩子,三个孩子争先恐后地抢着回答。一个孩子说:“我有两个哥哥,两个妹妹。”另一个说:“我有三个妹妹,一个哥哥。”第三个说:“我有一个妹妹,三个哥哥。”根据三个孩子的回答,以下哪项为真?
•Readthefollowingarticleabout’Go-Fast’,acost-sayingprogrammeintroducedbythecarmanufacturerGeneralMotors,andthe
TheHappinessEffectThenexttimeyougettheflu,therewillalmostcertainlybesomeoneyoucanblameforyourpain.Ther
最新回复
(
0
)