|
|
|
|
|
|
Archives
• Current Entries
• November 2009 • October 2009 • September 2009 • August 2009 • July 2009 • June 2009 • May 2009 • April 2009 • February 2009 • January 2009 • December 2008 • November 2008 • October 2008 • September 2008 • August 2008 • June 2008 • May 2008 • April 2008
Latest Entries
Loading...
 |
Human Resources
This area deals with assessing the need for and the supply of professional and other personnel. Functions include recruitment, selection, training, compensation, and evaluation of such personnel and examining ways to evaluate productivity and monitor accountability for results.
December 2008
Monday December 15, 2008
Posted by: Bryan Miller at 12:21PM EST on December 15, 2008
I’m seeking clarification on one of the statements in HR presentation #1 regarding the cost-effectiveness of external candidates. Specifically, that they are often a less expensive alternative to internal hires. I have found this to be the exception rather than the norm for most hires. Often, the “onboarding process” required for external applicants to become oriented to an organization’s policies, procedures, information systems, etc. requires a significant amount of one-on-one training and proctoring, which translates to additional labor costs. Since individuals chosen to serve as proctors tend to have a higher degree of experience, they often command a higher average hourly rate and therefore the cost to an organization can be substantial. This is particularly evident in critical care areas (ICU, CVICU, etc.). I’m curious what thoughts other participants have on this issue. Sunday December 14, 2008
Posted by: Andrew Anderson at 11:10PM EST on December 14, 2008
When hiring Health Care Professionals is there a hire likely hood for hiring individuals who were problematic at there previous employment. Factors contributing would be the shortages and demand for health care professionals, as well as, the limitation in the required skills/education. In other industries there is a blending of skills sets that can be obtained through aggressive recruitment practices. However, in the health care field you can not obtain fresh ideas by recruiting successful individuals from other corporate structures (such as IBM, GM etc...).
Saturday December 13, 2008
Posted by: Keith McGuinness at 8:57PM EST on December 13, 2008
In industries where the supply of a particular professional, say accountants for example, exceeds demand, the goal of the hiring process and of performance measurement may be to improve the overall quality of the accounting staff by replacing under-performers aggressively. But, in healthcare, where the demand for nurses exceeds supply, and the emphasis shifts to recruitment and retention, do you see hospitals investing in employee development and training programs to improve the quality of nursing staff? Or does quality suffer?
Posted by: Victor Stiebel at 3:34PM EST on December 13, 2008
Having been in the position of answering questions about former employees and checking on new hires, I find the legal gobledeegook is a real limiting factor. How does one really get to know if a person is legitimately presenting themselves? You are dependent on what people say about them. A great question I've been asked is "would you hire this person again if you had the chance?" I'm afraid that too often for problem employees, a new job prospect is an opportunity for the old employer to 'get rid' of a problem. (Been in that position too!)
Thursday December 11, 2008
Posted by: Barry Goettsch at 9:36PM EST on December 11, 2008
My hospital is not unionized. I have heard horror stories from some that are and worse from some that came awfully close. Has anyone been part of successfully reversing or disbanding an existing union in their hospital? How was this achieved? I think unionization is an act of desperation by employees so how do you regain the loss of trust or change the perception of dishonesty or reverse whatever it was that pressed staff to seek such a desperate measure? Barry Goettsch
Posted by: Barry Goettsch at 9:28PM EST on December 11, 2008
In our organization we compete for qualified staff on a daily basis as does everyone. We utilize our state hospital association's annual salary survey to maintain consistency, as do other hospitals, or so they claim. However, as we interview candidates and verify wages they claim to be being paid or being offered we find inconsistencies with what hospitals are reporting to the salary survey and what they are actually paying. How do you maintain consistency in applying wages fairly and achieve competetiveness when you feel other hospitals are paying more? How do you adapt your wage application processes so you are not stuck in an less then competitive situation? I have suggested taking the figures stated in the wage survey and adding a percentage across the board that we feel represents what others may be paying. What do you think? What would you suggest? Thanks Barry Goettsch Wednesday December 10, 2008
Posted by: John Walker at 5:37PM EST on December 10, 2008
I have often found some of the best candidates to be significantly lacking in content experience, but want to hire them because of attitude, spirit, demonstrated capability to deliver results with new projects and unfamiliar content knowledge. I feel I can teach someone to do anything but I can't teach them to be a true team player with a positive and infectious attitude. This has presented challenges with HR, as there are clearly other candidates that on paper, are more qualified. I have been restricted in some cases. My judgment - ultimately we succeed or not through those we hire. Has anyone dealt with this scenario? I'm told that selection of some of my best candidates would create Equal Opportunity issues, and have been dissuaded by HR and Legal.
Posted by: Linda Lawton at 12:04PM EST on December 10, 2008
One of the readings said that "job security and long term employment promote productivity." I don't see that as being the variable that influences productivity. It almost seems the opposite could be true, they could take the job for granted and not feel that need to be productive for a good review and job security.
Posted by: Linda Lawton at 11:58AM EST on December 10, 2008
Our organization uses the interview process by Gallup to assess the fit of candidates to the requirements of the job (for managers / directors / etc.). I'm wondering if anyone else has used this process over a period of time, and if so if they found the candidate match to be reflective of what they learned during the interview process, and thus a successful hire and good match for the position to which they were hired? If you don't use Gallup, what other tools / interviews / testing do you use that you find to be an accurate predictor?
Monday December 8, 2008
Posted by: Linda Lawton at 11:49PM EST on December 8, 2008
The book said during reductions in workforce part time workers are reduced first. I think it is and should be based on other criteria in some organizations (in unionized models for example it may be based on seniority or other defined criteria by contract).
Posted by: Linda Lawton at 11:42PM EST on December 8, 2008
The reading said you cannot ask about memberships in organizations during an interview. What about if they were listed in the candidates' resume?
|
