Talent Management Trends in Higher Education

January, 2010

At the end of 2009 PeopleAdmin conducted a nationwide, online survey of Human Resources professionals in Higher Education. The survey included questions about recruiting volume, budgeting, and staffing, as well as a series of questions to better understand recruitment process issues and the adoption of technologies to address those issues. Additional topics include the use of Social Media (Web 2.0) tools, reporting and metrics, recruitment advertising, committee/panel hiring, and faculty recruiting.

The study’s key findings include:

Executive

Summary

• 39% of institutions are managing their recruitment process manually or with basic online tools such as spreadsheets. When asked to rate their satisfaction with their recruiting process, those that use an applicant tracking system are 4.5 times more likely to be satisfied with their process than those who have yet to automate.

• When asked about their top recruitment process challenges, integrating hiring data with other HR systems, delivering recruiting reports and metrics, managing the faculty hiring process, and managing search committees rated as the most difficult to manage.

• In terms of overall talent management challenges, institutions reported succession planning, performance management, workforce planning, and onboarding new employees as their most difficult processes to manage.

• 75% of organizations advertise 50% or more of their jobs externally. 57% of responders spend $25,000 or less per year on recruitment advertising. Local newspapers are the top source of recruitment advertising. Higheredjobs.com, InsideHigherEd.com, Careerbuilder.com, and Monster.com are the top online choices.

• Less than 20% of institutions are utilizing social media tools for recruiting. Those who are utilizing the tools rank LinkedIn, Twitter, and Facebook as most effective.

• 70% of responders are either not measuring the recruiting process/function or are utilizing basic reports. Of those actively measuring the recruiting function, top areas of measurement are EEO, time-to-fill, and first-year turnover.

0-2508%

251-1,00038%

1,001-250025%

2,501-5,00015%

>5,00014%

0-50018%

501-2,50031%2,501-10,000

30%

10,001-25,000

11%

25,001-50,0006%

More than 50,0004%

0-2521%

26-10036%

101-25019%

251-50013%

501-1,0007%

More than 1,0004%

Number of Employees

Over 400 Higher Education institutions participated in the survey. 8% of the responders were from institutions with 250 or less employees, 63% from institutions with 251-2,500 employees, and 29% from those with 2,500+ employees. 57% of the responders manage 100 or less vacancies per year and a majority of the responders (61%) manage 500-10,000 applications per year.

Audience

Demographics

Number of Annual Vacancies Number of Applications Received Annually

We use paper applications and track the process

manually.10%

We use a combination of

paper and online tools such as

spreadsheets to track the process.

29%

We use an automated system

developed internally5%

We use an Applicant Tracking System

purchased externally48%

Other8%

39% of institutions are managing their recruitment process manually or with basic online tools such as spreadsheets. When asked to rate their satisfaction with their recruiting process, those that use an applicant tracking system purchased externally are 4.5 times more likely to be satisfied with their process than those who have yet to automate.

Hiring Process

Automation and

Satisfaction

How are you currently managing your recruiting process? How satisfied are you with your current process?

17.08%

28.22%

54.55%

76.61%

0.00%

20.00%

40.00%

60.00%

80.00%

100.00%

Paper-based process

Partially automated

process

System developed internally

System purchased externally

When asked about their top recruitment process challenges, integrating hiring data with other HR systems, delivering recruiting reports and metrics, managing the faculty hiring process, and managing search committees rated as the most difficult to manage.

Recruitment

Process Challenges

On a scale of 1-5, with 1 being least difficult and 5 being most difficult, please rate the following recruitment processes.

2.32

2.34

2.48

2.49

2.52

2.52

2.55

2.65

2.79

2.84

2.99

3

3.2

3.31

3.37

1.5 1.75 2 2.25 2.5 2.75 3 3.25 3.5

Advertising positions on external websites

Providing accessibility to disabled candidates

Handling EEO compliance

Scheduling Candidate interviews

Managing the student employment/work study process

Effective integration of a job site with .edu site

Communicating with candidates

Providing an effective employment site

Selecting the most qualified candidates

Managing job descriptions

Improving hiring workflow

Managing search committees

Managing the faculty hiring process

Delivering recruiting reports and metrics

Integrating hiring data with other HR systems

When asked about their talent management challenges, institutions reported succession planning, performance management, workforce planning, and onboarding new employees as their most difficult processes to manage.

Talent

Management

Challenges

On a scale of 1-5, with 1 being least difficult and 5 being most difficult, please rate the following talent management processes.

2.66

2.78

2.89

2.91

3

3.01

3.02

3.06

3.18

3.18

3.23

3.54

1.5 1.75 2 2.25 2.5 2.75 3 3.25 3.5 3.75

Tenure application process management

Sourcing Candidates to fill open positions

Faculty contract management

Utilizing web 2.0 technologies (i.e. Twitter and Facebook)

Managing employee compensation

Providing online competency testing

Providing online skills testing

Ensuring new hires are onboarded effectively

More effective workforce planning

Delivering performance review feedback to employees

Managing employee performance evaluations

Effective succession planning

22.50%21.05%

12.20%

10.30%9.17%

7.52%

5.37%

3.73% 3.67%

1.39%0.63% 0.57% 0.51% 0.51% 0.44% 0.32%

0.00%

5.00%

10.00%

15.00%

20.00%

25.00%

75% of organizations advertise 50% or more of their jobs externally. 57% of responders spend $25,000 or less per year on recruitment advertising. Local newspapers are the top source of recruitment advertising. Higheredjobs.com, InsideHigherEd.com, Careerbuilder.com, and Monster.com are the top online choices.

Recruitment

Advertising

0-25%13%

26-50%12%

51-75%24%

76-100%51%

% of Jobs Advertised Externally

0-$25,00040%

$25,001-$50,000

17%

$50,001-$100,000

13%

$100,001-$250,000

5%

More than $250,000

2%

Unknown23%

Recruitment Advertising Budget

Less than 20% of institutions are utilizing social media tools for recruiting. Those who are utilizing the tools rank LinkedIn, Twitter, and Facebook as most effective. However, it is important to note that the average ratings were low overall, with the highest at 2.63 on a five point scale.

Web 2.0/Social

Networking

Please rate the effectiveness of the following social networking tools, with 1 being ineffective and 5 being highly effective.

Which best describes your institution’s current use of web 2.0 enabled recruiting/social networking tools

We do not leverage these tools in staffing and recruiting.

78%

We use these tools occasionally.

14%

We use these tools regularly.

5%

We are expert at using these tools

0%

Other3%

2.63 2.56

2.02

1.641.51 1.46 1.4

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

70% of responders are either not measuring the recruiting process/function or are utilizing basic reports. Of those actively measuring the recruiting function, top areas of measurement are EEO, time-to-fill, and first-year turnover.

Recruiting

Metrics

Which best describes your use of recruiting metrics today? Which of the following recruiting metrics do you track regularly?

We are not using recruiting metrics.

31%

We create basic reports manually

or in spreadsheets.39%

We deliver reports through an

Applicant Tracking tool.19%

We integrate data from a variety of

sources and deliver metrics in a scorecard or dashboard.

7%

Other4%

0.37%

0.73%

2.20%

2.56%

7.69%

7.69%

17.58%

49.08%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Quality-of-hire

Manager Satisfaction

Candidate satisfaction

Cost-per-hire

First-year turnover

Other

Time-to-fill

EEO

Conclusion We found that the Higher Education marketplace is continuing to see the importance of bringing recruiting and talent management technologies into their institutions. Both HR executives as well as practitioners are acknowledging that they need to make technology investments that will improve their capabilities and lead them toward a more advanced, efficient, and cost-effective future-state.

According to the survey results, there are certain thresholds in hiring activity that drive the need to adopt technology. These drivers are institutions with 25+ openings per year that generate 2,500+ applications per year. We found that institutions in all size ranges were still struggling with paper-based or partially-automated processes, however, a large majority of organizations with <1,000 employees were seeking to make the transition to an automated hiring approach.

We also found that there was significant consensus around the criteria institutions utilize for choosing an Applicant Tracking technology partner. The top areas were selecting a solution that delivers value and return on investment, partnering with a provider that has strong customer support, implementation and training, working with a vendor that has experience delivering Applicant Tracking solutions to Higher Education, and choosing a partner that can implement the solution quickly.

Our survey audience had a great deal of clarity surrounding the features and functions they think are most important in choosing an Applicant Tracking system. These include the ability to integrate with other HR systems, robust reporting and metrics capabilities, capability to manage the faculty recruiting process and the search committee hiring process, and flexible workflow design.

Though many higher education institutions indicated they are currently dealing with budget reductions and resource constraints, we found that many more are using this time to find solutions that will ready them for increased hiring in 2010.

Founded in 2000, PeopleAdmin provides web-based Talent Management solutions uniquely designed for higher education, government, and non-profit organizations, including modules for applicant tracking, position description, and performance management. PeopleAdmin’s solutions are fully hosted using a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) model that ensures quick implementation, eliminates paper and manual tasks, improves efficiency and service levels, and supports HR compliance initiatives.

More than 500 leading higher education, public sector, and non-profit organizations throughout North America use PeopleAdmin solutions. PeopleAdmin has a diverse customer base that spans more than 45 states and includes city, county and state governments, colleges and universities, and research focused non-profit organizations. Some of PeopleAdmin’s prominent customers include the City of Austin, the Commonwealth of Virginia, Dartmouth College, Princeton University, The Scripps Research Institute, University of Chicago, University of Notre Dame, University of Oklahoma, and University of Pennsylvania.

PeopleAdmin has been recognized by Inc. Magazine as of the top 5000 fastest growing private companies in the US for three consecutive years, in addition to receiving the Stevie Award for outstanding Customer Service in 2009.

For more information visit: http://www.peopleadmin.com

About

PeopleAdmin