The market continues to improve for both IT personnel and the recruiters that help them find jobs.  Now, I'll agree we may never see the glory days of the late 90's or Y2K again.  But things are still going pretty well.

I want to talk about the three most popular hiring practices for clients.  They are, in no particular order, Contract to Hire, Permanent Placement, and straight Contract work.  Each one has its own benefits to both the employer and perspective employee.  But they also have pitfalls.  Some companies have one strategy that they use all the time.  If you are looking to get the best talent available to work for your organization, then the employer needs to be flexible and choose the hiring practice that best fits the current market conditions. 

One of the trends from the last couple of years that seems to be a favorite of employers is the Contract to Hire Model.  When the IT field is in a recession period or there is a great amount of local layoffs, the Contract to Hire Model is a great option.  The reasoning is that there is a lot of talent out on the street.  If there is a high amount of talent available, people aren't getting a paycheck, and there aren't a lot of jobs available; candidates usually jump on opportunities even if they are Contract to Hire.  The problem for the Contract to Hire model starts when the market is strong.  There are still people out on the street, but they are generally lower skilled and less desirable to many companies.  And employers generally don't want that type of person.  Employers clammor for higher quality candidates.  Well, the problem is that the higher quality candidates are either contractors (who want to stay contracting) or they are full time, permanent employees with another company.  And I pose this question to hiring managers all the time - If you were a full time employee at XYZ company and a main provider for your household; would you risk taking a 3 month or 6 month contract to hire opportunity?  Most managers understand the problem when it is presented to them in that manner.  A Contract to Hire situation is just that - its a contract for X amount of months and there are NO guarantees that you will be hired besides the managers good faith gesture.  It's a scary proposition because of the risk involved. 

The point I am trying to make is that if employers want higher level talent/employees in their organization, then they need to adjust to market conditions in their hiring practices.  Contract to Hire can be a good model at the right time.  Unfortunately, that time is not now.

 

What did you think of this article?

Liked
Disliked
No Opinion