With the Northwest candidate market more competitive than ever, employers are turning to staffing services to supplement their hiring and business needs. Which model will work best for your team? … Read More »
by Sara Bennett | December 27, 2019
With the Northwest candidate market more competitive than ever, employers are turning to staffing services to supplement their hiring and business needs. Which model will work best for your team? … Read More »
by Jeanne Knutzen | September 3, 2015
0 Blog, Human Resource Roles, INFO AND RESOURCES FOR JOB SEEKERS above the crowd, differences, employers, Employment Agency, Employment Agency Bellevue, hiring, Hiring Seattle, jobs, jobs seattle, make a difference, Seattle Staffing Agencies, Staffing Agency, temp jobs, Temporary Staffing
“Above the Crowd” is just one more way for us to talk about “making a difference” which has been a watchword for our company, the PACE Staffing Network, since its founding over 35 years ago. Being different by finding people for our clients who “make a difference”, and by helping our clients differentiate their businesses from their competitors, is, for us, the one and only way to truly rise “above the crowd”. … Read More »
by Jeanne Knutzen | May 13, 2014
Healthcare, IT, Creative, Other
Each year InsightSquared, a business analytics company, and Staffing Industry Analysts, publishes a report of recruiting metrics for the staffing industry.
Their last report was published in June 2013, showing data from 200 staffing firms generated between 5/1/2012 and 4/30/2013 – approximately one year of placement data, over 30,000 individual placement records.
Their report covers two key metrics:
Both metric types were analyzed by two types of placements:
The industry segments studied were a cross section of IT, Healthcare and Life Sciences, Media/Advertising/Creative and Other.
For those of you who want an idea of how your internal recruiting services compare to typical staffing industry metrics, here are the highlights of the 2013 staffing metrics you can use for comparison.
1. Across all industry segments, the Average Fill Ratio was:
The segment with the highest ratios of fill were Healthcare and Life Sciences; 63% for temp/contract placements and 27% for Permanent placements. The lowest ratios of fill came out of the IT segment where only 28% of contract reqs were filled and 22% of direct hire reqs.
2. Across all industry segments, the Average Time-to-Fill (number of days required to fill a job order) was:
The segment showing the longest “time-to-fill” was Healthcare and Life Sciences; 66 days for temporary/contract placements and 158 days for Permanent placements. Media and Advertising talent had an average of 21 days for contract staff and 53 days for permanent staff.
Because we (the PACE Staffing Network) do so much work in the healthcare market, we paid attention to the unique recruiting stats for Healthcare and Life Sciences. We think there may be two factors in play that are impacting just how much outside the norm this market segment performs:
The PACE Staffing Network has been servicing the healthcare industry for over 20 years. Our expertise in recruiting the specialized non-clinical candidates needed for hospitals, clinics, physician groups, surgical centers, etc. and creating networks of clinical recruiters and vendors working in niched areas of healthcare offers a unique one stop service delivery model for busy administrators and HR teams. Our focus is on improving your fill ratios and lowering your fill times, all while ensuring that every step in your compliance process is carefully managed. For more information on our recruiting networks, contain Nancy Swanson, our VP of Partnership Development at 425-454-1075 ext. 3010 or email Nancy at email@example.com. You can also visit us online at www.pacestaffing.com.
by Jeanne Knutzen | April 23, 2014
“The single biggest problem in communication is the mistaken notion that it has taken place.” – George Bernard Shaw How we communicate, the conversations we have with others, is a key factor in our successes (or failures) as leaders—particularly when it's time to promote, lead, or influence change. Conversations that create misunderstandings or hurt feelings will inevitably create mistakes, lower productivity, and damage team morale. In fact, miscommunications are one of the leading causes of “stress” amongst both employees and their leaders. It's often not the change itself that is the challenge—it's all the failed conversations that go on around and about the change that are most impactful to a leader's effectiveness. Here are FIVE THINGS leaders can do to make the conversations we have with others, particularly during times of change, will produce the results we intend. 1. Be Concise. Think about what you want to say and say it clearly and directly—with ordinary language, not big words or long sentences. If something is hard to communicate, it's probably equally hard to hear. Take the time to make your message simple. And don’t beat around the bush! Focus on a handful of key points and state them clearly. If you use examples, make sure they are relevant to your message. Communicate to learn something about people and situations; to clarify and inform—not to impress. 2. Be Redundant. Start and end your message with the most important thing you want others to hear: “I am concerned about __________________ and want to make sure we think of all angles." “While I'm still concerned about __________________, I think we have done a good job of exploring all angles for addressing this issue." In this particular case, your message is about your concerns and your need to invite and reinforce the team getting involved in finding a solution. At the end of the conversation, you still have concerns, but you also want to reinforce the team's engagement. Make sure they know what they accomplished! Frame your communications with conversational book ends. Open your message with an announcement of what you will be talking about. Close your conversation with what you did talk about. "What I want to talk about today is your role on the team and how it's changing." "What we talked about today is your role on the team and all the ways it has changed." 3. Listen More. Tell Less. To engage people in the work it takes to change, it is never enough just to tell people what you want them to do or know and then give feedback when they don't do as you say, or know what you taught. (Sound familiar?) To be an influential agent for change, the first step is to see the situation through the eyes of others, not just your own. Telling others what they should do (or worse yet "should have done") is a tactic that while quick and easy to execute, doesn't reliably get you the results you need. A frequent outcome is misunderstandings, hurt feelings and confusion. Telling assumes your listeners see the same things you do, which is never the case! Entering into genuine conversations about what others are thinking or feeling about the change, allows for learning—all parties. “I’d really like to hear your thoughts on this situation. I have been going over what happened and think I have some ideas, but don’t want to get stuck behind some information that you might have that I don’t.” And when it's time for feedback, make it quick and to the point. Long lectures about the what's and whys of "doing it right" are more likely to annoy than inform. 4. Clarify. Clarify. Clarify. Expecting others to “get the message, or make quick and lasting changes" after one message, is a huge mistake and leads to many dysfunctions not only in our communications with others, but ultimately your relationships as well. Replace “I thought we had already discussed that," with "my bad, I wasn't as clear as I could have been." When it comes to communications, lower your expectations of what's possible. Keep communicating. Observe behavior to see just how much of your message has been turned into action, and what of your message needs more work. Confront those who are openly ignoring what you have to say. Gently guide those who you know are trying, but aren't quite where you are—yet. When time is short, and you need to change behavior quickly, follow up your conversations with the request that they summarize what they just heard and the 3-4 things they want to do differently on the go forward. Discuss their plan until you reach agreement, and then follow up to ensure it is executed. While it is possible for ONE GREAT conversation to produce significant change, in most cases, one conversation lays the groundwork for better, easier conversations to follow! The best communicators are often people with simple messages, repeated often. 5. Check Your Filters... those nasty assumptions about the motives and beliefs of others that keep you from hearing what they have to say or discounting what you are hearing because it doesn't align with your beliefs and assumptions. If you have a filter about others that just won’t go, away address it openly and always with a willingness to learn and/or “be wrong.” “It feels like we are seeing this situation from two very different perspectives. Let's spend a little time talking about what we are each experiencing." The best relationships often grow out of situations where there is conflict between very different points of view; where two people genuinely see and/or believe something very different about a particular situation or event. Digging deep to find those places of agreement—either on facts or goals—can become a powerful base for shared respect and understandings. As leaders, taking the time to improve the quality of conversations we have with our key stakeholders—our boss, our team, our peers and coworkers, will have direct impact on our results—particularly during periods where our real job is to help others change, either their behavior or their perspective.
by Jeanne Knutzen | April 10, 2014
The following article is an edited version of an article written by Dr. John Sullivan for the ERE Daily on Monday, April 7th, 2014. Those who follow my articles know that I frequently write on the positive trends and big ideas that I think recruiting leaders need to be aware of. I don’t often write about challenges or problems believing that most of us don’t want to dwell on the negative. Since I am predicting that during the next few years we will encounter a completely transformed world of recruiting, it only makes sense to shift our conversation and focus on our upcoming challenges. If recruiters aren’t prepared to mitigate these challenges, they may grow out of control, causing exponential damage to your company and its performance. The Top 10 – in order of priority: 1. Not being prepared for the return of intense recruiting competition. With so many jobless individuals applying for every open position, it has been easy for recruiters and hiring managers to pick and choose from numerous applicants. Recruiting was a relatively easy process. As the economy improves, the power in the recruiting relationship will inevitably shift away from the corporation to the job seeker – changing the “ease” with which the recruiting function can be executed. Most corporate recruiting functions simply aren’t ready for a return to intense competition for candidates. The primarily “active” recruiting approaches that have worked and dominated over the last handful of years will simply fail when the focus shifts to fighting over prospects and candidates. And the “war for talent” will be even more challenging if recruiting resources are short. 2. The increased volume of open positions will overload the recruiting system. In addition to having to fight for individual talent, an increase in the volume of hiring will further stress most existing recruiting systems to the limit. Obviously as corporate growth increases, so will the hiring volume. Challenges retaining talent will further increase that hiring volume. Last year alone, corporate turnover increased by 45% and I am predicting a similar increase for this year and next. Turnover will increase because as the job market opens up in specific industries, regions, and technical jobs, many employees who have been focusing on job security will begin to realize that it’s time to move on. Because most corporate retention teams have been completely decimated and retention approaches not updated, corporate efforts to prevent this increased turnover will have little impact. For recruiting leaders this means that the combination of new corporate growth and high employee turnover will dramatically increase the volume of open positions beyond their capacity to produce the results needed. 3. Rusty hiring managers and underdeveloped recruiters have diminished capabilities. A low volume of hiring and the lack of competition may have caused the capabilities of your hiring managers and recruiters to degrade significantly. Adding to that condition the fact that there has been little money for development or training for either recruiters or managers will mean that in growth mode both are likely to initially stumble under this new environment. 4. A lack of speed will restrict your results. The business world moves much faster today than it did during the last recruiting boom. Unfortunately, recruiting hasn’t maintained its speed capability due to fewer resources, a lack of competition, and less focus on “time to hire” statistics. When top candidates have multiple offers, they simply won’t be around when indecisive managers finally make their hiring decision. In a newly competitive and faster moving world, delays in hiring will be costly, and unfortunately, reducing time to hire is one of the most difficult objectives to achieve within recruiting. 5. Long Ignored employer brands will begin to negatively impact recruiting effectiveness. In a down economy, with applicant surpluses, recruiting leaders did not pay much attention to their external employer brand image. Few have taken the time to measure their employer brands, and as a result, recruiting leaders often don’t realize how their “talent failures” (including layoffs, pay cuts, promotional freezes, etc.) have hurt their employer brand image. Once competition for top talent becomes intense, leaders will realize that a weak Internet or social media employer brand will prevent top talent and innovators from even considering applying at your firm. Unfortunately, most recruiting leaders define employer branding incorrectly and rebuilding an employer brand is both time consuming and expensive. 6. Your current recruiting process may not have the capability of recruiting innovators. One of the things that executives have learned from the success of firms like Google and Apple is the value of innovation and innovative employees. Unfortunately, most recruiting processes are not designed to effectively identify or recruit innovators who expect to see innovation and technology as an integral part of the hiring process. Without a strong employer brand and a separate sub-process designed specifically for recruiting innovators, the chance of recruiting a top industry innovator to your firm may approach zero. 7. Your recruiting strategy may be years out of date. Obviously without the direction provided by a strategic plan, your firm may suffer several years of weak results. Surprisingly, most recruiting functions actually operate without any written and distributed recruiting strategy. But even if you have a strategy, it is rarely updated to meet the needs of a new and much more intense global recruiting market. The strategy must also include a competitive analysis of your recruiting competitors to ensure that your firm’s strategy and approach produces superior results and a measurable competitive advantage. 8. Antiquated recruiting metrics lower your credibility with executives. Whether you have a seat at the table or not, recruiting leaders simply will not be listened to and funded unless they have the right metrics to quantify the dollar impact that high-performing new hires have on corporate revenue. And of course the biggest corporate metric omission is the failure of the majority of firms to accurately measure the quality of hire. As a result, few corporate recruiting functions can convincingly prove that they hire top performers and innovators with advanced skills and high retention rates. Only a handful of functions have predictive metrics that are necessary in order to alert recruiters and hiring managers about upcoming recruiting issues and opportunities. 9. A shortage of effective recruiters is on the horizon. Everyone knows that this long period with a down economy has decimated the ranks of corporate recruiters. Many of those who were laid off have left the profession. And the bad taste that it left in their mouths may cause most never to return. Since there are no college programs that turnout recruiters, recruiting leaders need to prepare for the time when competition for top recruiters will become intense. Existing employed recruiters will be in such a demand that they will be “bid on” by other firms, and finding effective replacement recruiters on the open market will be extremely difficult and expensive. Training new recruiters themselves may be the only effective option available to many firms. 10. The lack of recruiting resources. Unless you work at Google, the odds are that your function has already suffered numerous dramatic budget cuts over the last several years. You’re going to need a significantly higher budget if you expect to have a reasonable chance to increase your employer brand, recruiting volume, recruiting speed, and quality of hire. Unfortunately, most recruiting leaders simply don’t have the capability of building a strong business case that quantifies the tremendous dollar impact that recruiting has on corporate revenue and results. Additional Challenges There are several additional strategic problems that didn’t make the list, because I determined that even though they are important, they had a lower impact. But since every industry and company faces unique problems, add your unique problems to your “keep an eye on list.”
by Jeanne Knutzen | September 24, 2013
We wanted to share with our customers an edited version of a recent article by John Zappe published in The Fordyce Letter. Here’s the data Mr. Zappe is referencing—data from a recent study conducted by Duke University, polling over 500 US CFOs. It would appear that US companies are shifting away from a reliance on full-time, permanent workers and moving to workforces with larger representations of temporary, contract, and part-time employees. When I see data like this I remember back to the days when I first became a student of staffing and heard futurists like Charles Handy (author of Age of Unreason) talking about the future of the work force looking like a clover leaf—33% core employees; 33% temp employees (auditioning for core positions) and 33% outsourced providers (doing work for an organization that fell outside the organization’s core competencies). Mr. Zappe attributes the current trend to “a fragile economy and the looming implementation of the national healthcare program.” As reported in this study, 59% of CFOs have increased temporary and part-time workers and are turning with greater frequency to outside consultants and advisers. “The results show the emotional impact of the recession lingers on, keeping CFOs wary about spending, especially on hiring, even as they are more optimistic about their company’s financial health.” The level of optimism about profitability was good. US CFOs reported their expectations that profits will raise an average of 10%. At the same time, they predicted hiring to stabilize at the current low levels, overall headcounts to increase by only 2%. Outsourced employment was targeted to grow at 3%--significantly faster than other types of workers. Economic uncertainty was cited by 44.3% as the reason for not hiring permanent full-timers. The new healthcare law was cited by 38%, while 24% said salary considerations kept them from full time hiring. Of the 28% of companies reported to be employing workers outside of the US, almost 75% expected to add additional workers in the coming year, with the majority of them adding at least as many overseas as in the United States. This article was prepared by Kyle Fitzgerald, Client Solutions Manager of the PACE Staffing Network using information from a variety of sources. For a conversation with our consulting team on what this change in workforce demographics means to you and your company, email us firstname.lastname@example.org. Our mission is to help companies use alternative staffing strategies to their competitive advantage.
by Jeanne Knutzen | September 18, 2013
0 Blog, Human Resource Roles Job Market, pace staffing, Recruitng Profile, Seattle Staffing, Seattle Staffing Agency, Seattle Temporary Staffing, Staffing Agency, Temporary Staffing In Seattle, Work Environment
Hiring the right employee isn’t just about finding the best talent in the marketplace, but finding and eventually hiring an employee whose skills, work style and motivations best “fits” the unique requirements and offerings of a specific job and the work environment that goes along with it. To “hire right,” hiring managers and recruiters need to first understand the type of employee who best fits the actual work requirements—to create what we call a RECRUITING PROFILE. Recruiting profiles are different from JOB DESCRIPTIONs, in that they are singularly focused on defining the qualities of candidates best suited to do the work identified in the job description. An effective RECRUITING PROFILE helps recruiters and hiring manager’s source candidates from the right places, recruit them for the right reasons, and hire the one candidate who best fits the full scope of work requirements. It focuses on KEY REQUIREMENTS, both the hard and soft skills needed for success, instead of wasting recruiter time chasing a perfect candidate who may or may not exist. Here’s our list of 25 things recruiters and hiring managers need to know about a job BEFORE they begin the search for candidates. This is a list based on our years of experience supporting countless hiring decisions, paying attention to what works and what doesn’t. THE WORK 1. Why Does this Job Exist? From an organizational perspective why is this job needed? What is it intended to accomplish/contribute different from the contribution of other jobs on the team? 2. How Will the Employee Spend Their Day? What are the reoccurring tasks the employee will need to perform on a regular/daily basis? How will the employee spend most of their time? Doing what type of work/tasks? 3. Variety. Scope of Work. What is the range of work or variety of tasks that must be performed in order to produce the work product needed? How varied in terms of content or complexity? How much organization is required to deliver the results needed? 4. Work Cadence. What is the typical pace of work that is required to achieve deadlines? Will the employee be expected to be an accomplished multi-tasker? How frequently are they asked to meet deadlines and what is the impact to others for an employee missing a deadline? 5. Key Deliverables. What are they key outcomes or work products that must be delivered on a regular basis by the person doing this job? What is the impact to the team/organization if the work doesn’t get done? Who/what is impacted? 6. Complexity. How would you describe the level of detail or complexity that goes into the completion of each deliverable/work product? How many factors must be considered before taking action? How much coordination must be done with others? 7. Quality or Quantity? Is the work content or expectations the type that would require an employee to consistently choose between quantity or quality? Or is the balance somewhere in between? 8. Problem Solving/Challenges. What types of problems are typically addressed by this employee? Will the issues that come up tend to be unique or reoccurring requiring application of proven solutions? Will the employee be asked to think outside the box—to come up with something new or innovative, or are more tried and true solutions more valued? 9. Interpersonal Communications. Who and what type of people does this person interact with on a regular basis? How often? Written? E-mail, etc.? Are there any special circumstances surrounding the people they will communicate with regularly? Styles they need to accommodate? 10. Influence. Persuasion. Negotiations. How often will they be required to influence, persuade or negotiate with others? Will those people tend to be bosses? Peers? Direct reports? THE WORK ENVIRONMENT 11. Decision Making/Autonomy. How many and what kind of decisions will this person make at the direction of others? How many and what kind of decisions are they expected to make on their own? 12. Change. Would you describe the work environment as organized, structured and stable, or in frequent flux, subject to change without a lot of notice or preparation? How are changes handled in the work environment? 13. Training/Mentorship Availability and Requirements. What level of training, mentorship or hands on instruction will be available to the candidate? How much of the work to be performed will require company-specific training? 14. Teamwork. Collaborations. How often will the employee be asked to collaborate with others on getting work done, to make decisions? To put team goals ahead of personal goals? 15. Learning. To deliver the outcomes required, how often and in what ways will they be required to learn something new? Are they required to do most of their learning on their own, or how is new knowledge introduced into your work environment? 16. Management Style. Goal Setting. How tightly will the employee be managed with respect to goals, expectations and performance tracking? How will goals and expectations be communicated? Measured? What are the consequences of below target performance? 17. Management Style.Feedback and Support. How often and in what ways will they be given feedback? How available is their supervisor to answer questions, provide support? KEY REQUIREMENTS 18. Required/Preferred Skills. To deliver the work products required, what skills will be required that can’t be acquired on the job, via training or instruction? What skills would be helpful, but not absolutely necessary? Will the required skills be needed at the entry, intermediate, or advanced levels? 19. Required/Preferred Knowledge. To deliver the work products required, what knowledge or subject matter expertise is needed? Preferred? What components of the knowledge required can be taught or learned on the job rather than via formal education/training? 20. Required/Preferred Work Experience. To deliver the work products required, how much actual on the job experience is required? Preferred? Is it possible that a fast tracker could have acquired the skills or knowledge needed with less work experience? Are there some specific types of work experiences more valuable or relevant than others? 21. Required/Preferred Personal Qualities Important to Success. What are the key personal qualities that a candidate needs to have in order to be successful? How would you describe the qualities of previous candidates who have been successful in the role? How are those traits different from those who have been unsuccessful 22. Required Certifications/Education. What certifications or licenses are required in order to perform the required job functions? MOTIVATORS 23. Attraction Opportunities. What are some of the special opportunities that will be available to the employee who accepts this job? Opportunities to learn new things? To advance their career? To make a noticeable contribution? In other words, why would someone want to take this job? Where in their career cycle would the preferred candidate likely be, entry level? Mid/aspirational level? Mastery level? 24. Attraction Elimination Issues. Are there any factors in work content that would eliminate candidates based on certain personal preferences or restrictions? Travel? Availability? Pay rate? Physical working conditions? 25. “Corporate Fit.” How would you describe the “selling features” your company typically uses to recruit and retain its employees? Opportunity for advancement? Pay/Benefits? Entrepreneurial environment? Industry leadership? For a copy of a one page RECRUITING PROFILE which will summarize all of the information needed to focus your search for the right candidate, contact us at email@example.com. You can also inquire about additional interviewing guides, tools and checklists that are a part of our HiringSmart Best Practices Series.
by Jeanne Knutzen | August 14, 2013
The percentage of job offers made to new candidates that get turned down because of compensation related issues? According to CareerBuilder's recent Staffing & Recruiting Pulse Survey, approximately two thirds (67 percent) of a candidates' salary expectations exceed the employers' offers. This data is gathered from offers made via staffing companies and represents an increase of 6 percentage points over last year. It should come as no surprise that compensation was among the top reasons candidates turned down offers in the last year, but also one of the main reasons why employees changed jobs.
by Jeanne Knutzen | April 16, 2013
0 Blog, What's New in Staffing? 1099, 1099 Misclassification, Department of Labor, HR Professionals, PACE Staffing Network, Seattle Staffing, Seattle Staffing Agency, Staffing Agency, The Society for Human Resource Management
As part of our watch on the governments crack down on employee misclassifications and the impact on the 1099 workforce, we thought our readers might be interested in the latest efforts of the Department of Labor to expand its attack on all forms of employee misclassifications that impact a workers access to taxable levels of pay and benefits. The DOL’s Wage and Hour Division has proposed to conduct a survey to collect information from employees on 1) whether they are classified as an employee, independent contractor, or some other status, and 2) whether or not they understand the implications of their classification status on access to certain pay or benefits. The survey is being tagged as a first step in the larger “Right to Know” initiative, which they consider a way to “foster more openness and transparency in demonstrating an employer’s compliance” with certain recordkeeping requirements associated with the Fair Labor Standards Act. When fully implemented, “Right to Know” regulations would require HR professionals to disclose to their workers how they determined their classification and how their pay and access to benefits will be calculated. The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) has been asked to comment on the survey proposal and will question the necessity for the survey, its format, and its use. For more information on the DOL Misclassification Initiative you can visit their official website at www.dol.gov/whd/workers/misclassification. For information about the impact of a 1099 misclassifications and how to avoid the hidden liabilities of misclassifications in general, contact our firstname.lastname@example.org.
Getting ready to hire? Looking for your next job? We’ve got fast, easy solutions. LET’S CONNECT!
This article was written by Jeanne Knutzen, Founder of PACE Staffing Network, an award winning recruiting and temporary staffing agency headquartered in Bellevue Washington.
Direct Hire ✦ Temp to Hire Auditions ✦ Temporary Staffing
Employer of Record/Payrolling ✦ More
This article was written by Nicholas Black, Candidate Services Manager for the PACE Staffing Network, an award winning recruiting and temporary staffing agency headquartered in Bellevue Washington. If you are interested in finding out how PACE can “make a difference” in your job search, contact Nick at candidateservices@
This article was written by Astrid Parrish, a Recruiter at PACE Staffing Network, an award winning recruiting and temporary staffing agency headquartered in Bellevue, Washington.
This article was written by Sara Bennett, Marketing Manager of PACE Staffing Network, an award winning recruiting and temporary staffing agency headquartered in Bellevue Washington.