To go in-house or not to go in-house - what exactly are the benefits?
The rise and rise of the in-house recruiter appears to know no bounds.
Exponents of the model might cite (with good reason) that bringing recruitment in house affords the business a range of attractive upsides that is hard to ignore.
To the Evangelical Converts – an in-house solution achieves at least some of the following to an employer:
Lovely cash!
Retains much needed value within the business – that it might be argued, would otherwise be flowing out into the coffers of recruiters in the form of mark up and nasty ‘money for old rope’ fees.
Visibility of and ‘title’ over the lovely candidates...
The A listers that have been attracted by recruitment campaigns are now residing safe and secure in the bosom of the in-house team – soothing any paranoia about ‘the agency’ keeping all the best ones for themselves (does that really happen?!).
Coherent, joined up, streamlined and simple...
No longer the ‘you burn it and I’ll scrape it’ triple/quadruple handling of the process with multiple stakeholders dancing to a different beat, looking in a 100 different directions with differing ideas of what responsive looks like.
Overcoming the phenomenon of agency fatigue and tuned out candidates...
In-housers claim that they because the roles are advertised as ‘direct’ - those candidates that have tuned out of the overtures of your standard agency appeal – do, in fact, respond to the roles offered up by embedded recruiters.
Strategy: ‘by us – for us’ NOT by them for them...
Given we’re still experiencing near full employment and that the UK’s skills deficit remains chronic and with 300k roles unfiled in 2015 – smart businesses are turning their focus to developing better strategies to compete for the talent required to underpin and deliver their goals and objectives.

In-house is fast becoming a cornerstone of new ways of thinking and doing.

Above and beyond this veritable sweetshop of goodies – there are plenty of other arguments for taking a more creative, maybe even radical approach to the talent management conundrum.

So what to do?
The reality is that for most businesses – in-house may not be a realistic option. Resources, time, expertise, scale, political will, uncertainty and other factors can make an equally persuasive case against such a move.
To coin an in-vogue term – such opportunities and decisions needn’t be non-binary (there – said it!). It’s not necessarily and either/or – there’s always ‘as well as’.
We’re a group with two orthodox recruitment businesses within it. Yet, we have a specialist in-house talent management service offering – applied as a hybrid best of both worlds strategy.
'What!!!!' I hear you shout.
Poacher turned game keeper. Cannibalising your own market. Biting the hand that feeds, doing something unpleasant on your own doorstep (I could go on...)

Nothing of the sort - what we have is an enabling strategy. A plan to keep us relevant, competitive and agile. The In-house method plugs us into opportunities that many are locked out of and introduces new opportunities to the group everyday.
What's more - clients trust what it does and appreciate the transparency - it's a win/win. Plain and simple.
Share and share alike – paying forward.
In the new sharing economy, working with clients to identify better ways of achieving the results they’re working towards – in a strategic partnership and sharing the substantial gains – is, we believe, a more sustainable, trusted and logical model and philosophy.

So if it's strategic and competitive advantage, game changing innovation and more value for money you're after – drop us a note to discuss case studies and a free business analysis to assess the suitability for in-house/hybrid.