<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Recruiting to Retain: Four Questions to Ask Employees</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.ere.net/2006/01/12/recruiting-to-retain-four-questions-to-ask-employees/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.ere.net/2006/01/12/recruiting-to-retain-four-questions-to-ask-employees/</link>
	<description>Recruiting News, Recruiting Events, Recruiting Community, Social Recruiting</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Mar 2010 11:05:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan Krogdahl</title>
		<link>http://www.ere.net/2006/01/12/recruiting-to-retain-four-questions-to-ask-employees/comment-page-1/#comment-1406</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan Krogdahl</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Jan 2006 01:52:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.ere.net/2006/01/12/recruiting-to-retain-four-questions-to-ask-employees/#comment-1406</guid>
		<description>Kaye - I am not so sure I agree with all of your points. In a small organisation maybe but in an organisation with a decent HR team most of what you are talking about (in my mind) falls to the broader HR business and not the resourcing specialism. I agree that it needs to be done but that resourcing should only handle their parts and the transition to other relevent part of HR to manage (leadership, talent, HR business partners, etc).

I believe Resourcing (internal) have responsibility for the new starter attrition (which falls back on to the quality of assessment) and redeployment attrition (i.e. making sure talent has the option for movement) but needs to work closely with the other HR specialism to take advantage of their specialist skills rather than trying to take responsibility themselves. Resourcing is by nature specialist, if we start trying to do everything we become HR generalists.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Kaye &#8211; I am not so sure I agree with all of your points. In a small organisation maybe but in an organisation with a decent HR team most of what you are talking about (in my mind) falls to the broader HR business and not the resourcing specialism. I agree that it needs to be done but that resourcing should only handle their parts and the transition to other relevent part of HR to manage (leadership, talent, HR business partners, etc).</p>
<p>I believe Resourcing (internal) have responsibility for the new starter attrition (which falls back on to the quality of assessment) and redeployment attrition (i.e. making sure talent has the option for movement) but needs to work closely with the other HR specialism to take advantage of their specialist skills rather than trying to take responsibility themselves. Resourcing is by nature specialist, if we start trying to do everything we become HR generalists.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
