RPO can deliver flexibility and lower costs, but if recruitment is considered a "core" function, then an internal team may be a better strategic fit, according to Cisco HR director Susan White.
White was one of 10 senior HR managers at multinational companies, interviewed about their experiences with RPO for a new report from international industry body the HR Outsourcing Association (HROA).
The Are you ready for RPO? report was produced by HROA's RPO working group, which includes global suppliers Alexander Mann, Randstad, Kenexa, Adecco, Manpower and others.
The report said Cisco had previously had an RPO arrangement in place, and had opted to return to an in-house team of permanent employees.
White said the company considered recruitment a core business activity, because "...the acquisition, retention and deployment of talent are critical to our success".
This meant staffing needed to be fully intertwined with the company's overall business strategy, and this was more achievable when the recruiters felt they were part of the organisation and imbued with its long-term culture and goals.
White added that from Cisco's perspective, while RPO could deliver cost reductions, scalability and flexibility, it tended to fall down when it came to creating a lasting, integrated partnership that could deliver long-term strategy.
"Many solution suppliers really only focus on the provision and management of pools of recruiters and sourcers on a semi-permanent or interim basis; they rarely provide the right level of resource/expertise required to create the link between their clients’ business strategy and the human capital requirements necessary to execute on that strategy," she said.
By contrast, Europe head of resourcing for UK bank Santander, Debbie Reeves-Malvagni said Santander traditionally outsourced "non-core" activities and this included recruitment.
But she noted that any RPO arrangement would struggle to deliver results unless the client company had built a solid internal staffing function and strategy beforehand.
"Make sure your processes are solid and that your recruitment doesn't suffer from any major problems, or there will be weak foundations for the provider to build on."
RPO helped tackle process issues, lack of expertise for GE Capital
GE Capital talent acquisition leader for EMEA, Hamish Nisbet, said that changing to an RPO had helped the company iron out problems with its traditional recruitment processes.
"Our HR generalists had multiple priorities and not enough expertise in recruitment; candidate experience was not optimal, and we had a need for best practice to come in."
Nisbet said the company was also motivated to try RPO as a means of managing its HR workload without committing to a higher fixed cost base.
"Across Europe, we anticipated an increase in hiring as the economy recovered, but faced increased competition in the market for good candidates... but we didn't want to substantially increase our HR headcount. This put a strain on the business in its capability to attract, retain and assess the right people."
Similarly, Jon Smiles, Asia-Pacific HR operations director for manufacturer PPG, said the company needed to ramp up hiring to support a rapid expansion in the region, but wanted to avoid taking on additional fixed costs.
He added that another reason the company chose not to go with an in-house model was that "the problem was also recruitment capability…because the team were HR generalists".
Allow for an unhurried implementation: Santander
Santander's Reeves-Malvagni said the company had learned from one of its previous RPOs that rushing the changeover process could hurt the end result.
"A previous implementation took 12 weeks from 100% in-house to outsourced; we subsequently realised this was very aggressive [in terms of timing] and as a result, it was clear there was a lack of finishing touches."