Downsizing
Employment resignations, firings, even layoffs create "holes" in a company's organization. The ups and downs in the economy has always been the excuse for many organizations to downsize by laying off staff. In fact a recent poll of executives reveals that downsizing (nice name for it, hub?) will continue for at least the next business cycle. Most will agree that the general economy is more of an excuse to layoff than a real business issue. Even in temporary layoff situations, companies are faced with having to replace individuals. This uncomfortable function is often the reason why firings are not done soon enough. Often "the devil we know is better than the devil we don't know" and we put off firing because we hate the process of hiring and the risks it brings.
Once an opening is created, for whatever reason. It is a good business decision to first decide if it is necessary to fill it, and if so, to take steps to fill it immediately. When companies put off immediate interviewing and hiring they can create a major monster.
Resentment
First of all, when someone is not doing a job someone else in the company has to. Even if two or three other people are "sharing" the function, these others aren't doing their regular duties as well simply because they resent having to do someone else’s work. This perception in the group or department becomes a resentful attitude the longer a position goes unfilled.
If the vacated position has anything to do with customers as in sales or customer service, the absence of an employee is even worse since the clients or customers just won't get the attention they need. Again, when someone else has to contact and work with these customers there is normally a credibility erosion due to uncertainty on the part of the customer. Temporarily assigned sales or customer service people just can't provide the psychological comfort level most customers or clients need.
Indecisive Management
Management appears indecisive even down right uncaring and ambivalent the longer a position stays vacant. Not only do peers of such positions feel put upon in having the extra duties they feel management is insensitive in it's desire to relieve them of the extra burdens. Management appears indecisive 'when it can't make up its mind about what to do regarding a vacancy. Good managers do want to fill vacant positions. It's just that the priority for it is low because other more immediate business issues seem to stare them in the face. Other day to day business issues are easier to work on than filling vacant positions. Since we do those day to day business functions easily and comfortably there is a tendency to avoid interviewing and hiring by putting it off. It is an unattractive duty we don't do regularly. How enthusiastic can one get over the idea of interviewing and hiring? It's just not a highly charged gratifying experience so it gets put off until absolutely necessary. Postponing interviewing and hiring makes it more and more difficult to do. This furthers the perception of indecisive management.
Weeds
The longer a position goes unfilled the more the "weeds grow" just like an unattended garden. The vacancy and filling it becomes a "monster." Most managers believe that it takes no more than two to three weeks to fill a vacancy. The truth is, as we have discussed in other issues, (without the use of a professional recruiter), it takes an average of 90 days to fill most mid to upper mid level positions, even when there is an urgency to do it. A professional recruiter can cut that time in more than half but even then, the length of time is greater than most managers perceive. Newton's law of motion and rest comes to mind. Other business issues, the end of the year, the end of the quarter, holidays, vacations, etc., can all be used as reasons to postpone interviewing and hiring. It's just a relatively unpleasant risky duty that can be easily postponed by rationalized excuses. Like most problems the longer the solution is put off, the harder it becomes to do. Interviewing becomes elongated over extracted periods of time. Viable candidates take other positions. Interviewing becomes confusing because too few or too many are interviewed over too long a time. Candidates perceive the interviewing company to be indecisive. Other managers, usually ones up the ladder, wonder about indecisiveness too. We have seen situations where the filling of a position was attempted four different times over a period of six months. Believe it or not, everyone in the firm stated that the filling of the vacancy was essential to the running of their business. The monster just grew and grew. The situation became more and more confusing, messy, unorganized, mired, etc. It was finally due to the wrath of the president telling his subordinates that one or all would be fired if the job wasn't filled quickly.
"Do it now" has got to be the approach to filling any vacancy. Lack of commitment to urgency only allows monsters and weeds to grow.
