HR Tech: Help or Hindrance?

Organizations that have fully or partially automated their recruitment and hiring processes have garnered better performance among their new hires and have reduced the time and cost to fill new positions, according to a new study.

The study, conducted by the Aberdeen Group, found organizations that have fully or partially introduced technology into their recruiting processes indicated that 73 percent of their new hires reached their first work productivity milestone on time, versus 67 percent for those with manual processes. Organizations with automated processes also reduced hiring time by 3 percent over the previous year, and reduced cost to fill by 4 percent, the study found.

In addition, organizations that have integrated recruiting technologies with other aspects of human capital management were able to fill positions more quickly, reduce turnover and hire a greater percentage of their top-choice candidates, the study found.

The government has moved toward automating its hiring processes, but many chief human capital officers across government have contended that such attempts have only made the jobs of human resources leaders easier and have not reduced the burden on applicants. Take the Homeland Security Department, which earlier this year scrapped its use of TalentLink, an automated tool that was supposed to help the agency automate ranking and rating processes, standardize vacancy announcements using plain language and facilitate better communication with applicants. "We have grown so reliant on technology for the hiring process in the government that it's actually hampered our ability to get the right candidates," DHS CHCO Jeffrey Neal told Wired Workplace in August.

So how can federal agencies strike a balance and reap the same benefits other organizations have found in automated hiring, as evidenced by the Aberdeen Group study? Does the government have to build too many workarounds into these systems to make them effective?