The recruitment methods adopted in different country of the world vary from country to country. For purposes of comparison, what is practiced in Europe, pan and USA will be discussed here.
Recruitment practices vary considerably within countries. Legislation determines .different levels of state intervention and worker participation and methods used jury in popularity according to national custom and practice.
As you would know, allure plays a role in recruitment. As there is a great variety of different cultures within the European Community, just as there are many different languages, it is difficult to comment on the ‘European culture’. There is a wide discrepancy in the zed of labor forces too.
here is a wide variation in the level of direct state involvement in the recruitment recess. In some countries, e.g. Portugal and Denmark, there is no statutory obligation to consult with the authorities over recruitment, whereas in others, e.g. range, Belgium and Spain, the state of HR planning service has to be informed fall vacancies.
The recruitment methods most frequently used are newspaper advertising, the Tate employment service, private employment agencies, and more informal methods, such as word of mouth and speculative applications.
Organizations frequently use a number of different methods, depending on the type of job to be filled, but legislation and custom and practice can lead to national variations.
The purpose of this very brief outline was to show you that there is no single best way of recruiting in Europe but that there are a number of different approaches and success will depend on several factors including the job itself and the country in which it is based.
Where equal opportunities are concerned, the European Union has issued directives and all member states have introduced regulations that proscribe discrimination in recruitment, and forbid any phrasing of a job advertisement which might suggest that either men or women would be more favored.
Enforcement, and the degree to which equal opportunities on grounds of race or sex are advocated positively, vary considerably between member states, however.
As you would expect, Japanese culture has had a big impact on the recruitment practice in that country. In Japan, employees are considered to be the most valuable asset an organization possesses and lifetime employment within one organization is the aim of both employer and employee. As such, many women may leave work on the marriage or on the husband’s relocation.
There is a two-tier system of employment status found in Japan. There are the regular and the special workers. ‘Regular’ workers for whom lifetime employment is anticipated, particularly in larger firms, are male and in possession of personal characteristics deemed suited to organizational ‘fit’ rather than skills and experiences specific to a particular job.
The other category, the special workers, includes full and part-time women, mid-career recruits (often possessing highly specialized skills), temporary workers, and foreigners.
‘Special’ workers are discriminated against in terms of security of a job, rewards, training opportunities, etc., and are seen as providing the flexibility required in the employment system where one group (regulars) have near lifetime security of employment.
As regards the recruitment methodology, Japan has certain peculiarities.
As a result of the culture described above, the Japanese labor market has traditionally been closed, although recently there has been an increase in the number of channels available in the recruitment process, including private employment agencies and headhunters.
University-organization links are strong, and most recruitment is either through university or college processes or through private connections, with graduates recruited on the personal recommendations of specific university professors.
Professors play a vital role here as in effect, they pre-screen graduates when they make recommendations. Most regular employees are hired directly from universities and schools once a year, with prestigious companies looking to prestigious universities for recruits. The 4old-boy’ network is very important.
The open labor market is more apparent with ‘special workers’ with the direct application more of a norm. Again, however, highly developed links with schools, subcontractors, subsidiaries, and retrenching firms are typical recruitment channels as Japanese organizations have a little tradition of ‘pirating’ employees from competitors.
In 1986, the Equal Job Opportunity Law was passed requesting companies to make efforts to treat men and women equally, arguing that the numbers of women in professions and leadership roles were small. The impact of legislation on the system does not appear to be marked.
Again the methods employed in the USA are very similar to those established in Britain, although Weather and Davis (1993) argue strongly in favor of the ‘blind’ advertisement, disguising the name and/or salary concerned (as opposed to the British preferred ‘good practice’).
An important aspect in the USA is the extensive legislation meant to provide equal opportunity without regard to race, religion, sex, disability, pregnancy, national origin, age (over 40), and Vietnam veterans.
Victims can sue for compensation and punitive damages (Civil Rights Act of 1991) in certain circumstances and courts can insist on certain actions being taken to remedy a given situation.
Many organizations have responded by drawing up affirmative action plans, which ensure compliance with the laws or remedy past discrimination.
Unlike in Britain quotas are acceptable and affirmative action plans must be registered by organizations where any part of the organization sells to the federal government.
You May Like Also: