Originally, I was going to write about a recent survey conducted by CareerBuilder regarding the usage of temporary workers within the U.S. But while I was reading an article summarizing the survey results, one particular sentence jumped out at me.
Eighty-five percent of respondents said that their company was not able to create lower skill positions because of an inability to fill higher skill positions that would be tied to those roles.
Now I’ve been in the staffing industry for over 13 years. I’ve participated in many surveys. I’ve read through dozens of survey results. I’ve attended staffing conferences, participated in workshops, read articles, spoken to “industry experts”, and even spent a little bit of time in sales speaking to hiring managers. Never before have I seen this stat. In fact, I don’t think I’ve ever heard this idea discussed.
So often we look at each individual position as an island. We either find someone or we don’t. But the bigger issue is that there are certain positions, higher skilled ones to be exact, that have an exponential effect on the level of production within each and every company. Filling those positions is key in more ways than one.
For example, within the software development cycle, the role of the architect is critical in determining how all the various configuration items connect. Dependencies need to be identified and any issues uncovered and addressed. So without the architect, other positions such as software engineers, software testers, etc. aren’t needed. This is one example of many.
From the perspective of the company, this means the proper amount of resources must be focused on filling higher skill positions. More resources than lower skilled positions. In fact, based on this information, one could argue significantly more resources. More recruiters, more sourcers, and maybe even an experienced staffing firm that has spent 23 years building a network of qualified highly skilled candidates. I know where you can find one if you’re looking.