2. 外语
  3. 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

admin2012-01-23  32
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.  
Traditional recruiting providers didn’t make strategic progress because
选项 A、they adopted new ways to help companies.
B、the solutions focused on project.
C、they didn’t find customers.
D、they had no access to best practices and innovative techniques.
答案B
解析 文中第五段提到“Although this represented a new challenge for both companies and providers, the solutions were primarily project-based and, therefore, rarely focused on achieving strategic improvements.”即：虽然这对公司和招聘服务提供商来说是个新的挑战，但是这些解决方案主要是以项目为基础的，因此，很少把注意力集中到取得战略性的进步上。所以，B项符合题意。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/eTFsFFFM
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
随机试题
最新回复(0)