Vendor Selection & Technology

 

In the last several years, vendors of staffing management solutions have improved their products, gotten to know customer needs better, and become extremely competitive on price. Companies have new options and can avoid spending huge sums of money and many months in writing complex applications that may be outmoded by the time they are actually rolled out. Recruitment software, often delivered on the ASP model, is state-of-the-art. Yet there are still companies for which the build option is a temptation.

 

The single most important consideration that weighs in favor of licensing recruitment automation software is core competency. Is developing a staffing automation application at the heart of your corporation’s expertise? Consider these three factors as well. Writing your own staffing management solution is:

Development Time

Time is not on your side. It is easy to underestimate how long it takes to build and implement a homegrown staffing management system. Suppose the users say they need a certain set of features in six months? As a homegrown system is being built, the users likely will get incremental features along the way. With a bought solution, on the other hand, the features come online very quickly during implementation.

 

The next criterion to consider is the availability of corporate resources. Management would prefer to remain flexible in the allocation of corporate resources. However, a decision to build a homegrown system will tie-down corporate resources for a lengthy period. Your analysis of true costs needs to include not only the fully burdened cost structure for employees who will be working on the project, but also the opportunity cost you are paying for having these resources working on the project. You can get an unpleasant surprise later in the development cycle when the team is beyond the point of return yet other more attractive opportunities arise but resources are not available to capitalize on the opportunity. For a point of reference, one leading vendor has spent about 350 man-years on its application – could your company commit as much?

 

Once development of a homegrown system has concluded, ongoing resources are still required to support and maintain the system. Often, maintenance of a homegrown solution quickly spirals into a succession of “quick fixes”. Users will point out a list of problems, and quick-fix solutions are developed to address each. Meanwhile, the growing need of users for additional functionality is not even in the picture.

 

The final and most important criterion to consider has to do with the core competencies of your organization. Your company’s revenue depends on the execution of certain business plans. The development of a world-class staffing management system is likely far removed from the company’s core business. Devoting resources to the development of a homegrown solution in reality amounts to building a competency that is unrelated to the company’s business plan.

 

When faced with the decision to license a solution from an ASP or find in-house or contract programmers to create a system from the ground up, consider when you need to make the solution available, what resources you have at your disposal and how close to the core of your competency base the solution lies. Note as well that a few leading companies have gone this route…and without being able to deliver, they have lost an important competitive edge in the staffing process.

 

Staffing automation solutions are large, long-term, mission-critical projects that are outside the skill set or capacity of most in-house teams. Since the market has now matured with clear leaders that seem likely to survive for the long term, it would be wise to go with a market leader’s offering. Unless you’re planning to become a major competitor, a market leader’s product will be faster, better and cheaper for you in the long run.