We face three challenges in the healthcare talent management
equation:
- A series of changes related to healthcare
reform
- Waves of new balanced budget act-styled cuts in reimbursement
that will test the ability of hospitals and physician practices to survive
- An outdated recruiting process model that is not up to the task to find the quality of leaders necessary to successfully confront these changes
If we only had to deal with the recently passed healthcare
(payment) reform legislation, that would be like a walk in the park. We are, after all, an industry whose
leadership is among the most adept adapters in any business sector. But there will be more. With skyrocketing budget deficits fueled in
large part by high healthcare costs that stretch the Medicare program, it would
be unrealistic for hospital CEOs and physicians not to expect a series of balanced
budget act cuts that will squeeze out additional savings.
Medicare is not sustainable in its current form. Everyone in Congress knows it, but that was conveniently
not part of the healthcare reform debate.
Things are getting so bad that the US government will not have the money
to pay the bills in about 10 years, according to David Walker, President of the
Peter G. Peterson Foundation and former Comptroller General of the United
States, unless it makes dramatic changes in the portfolio of benefits and the
amount of money it pays to healthcare providers. Absent that, the treasury department must
borrow 100 percent of every dollar that is paid to hospitals and physicians,
piling on the already out-of-control national debt. Ironically,
some industry analysts believe these types of reimbursement cuts will
probably lead to more structural reform than anything Congress might have the
courage to attempt. If you cut enough money
out of the system, these analysts posit, hospitals and physicians will be
forced to make dramatic and cost-saving changes in delivery systems in order to
survive.
Only the best
leaders and managers will be able to clearly anticipate the dramatic changes
before they arrive at the front door of our U.S. hospitals and physician practices. Only the best will be able to create new
strategies and new solutions on the fly.
So, there is an important connection between the financial mayhem that is certain
to occur over the next seven to 10 years and the strategies we use to recruit and retain the best people
Unfortunately, the current recruiting business model used by
the majority of search firms, outsourcing companies, placement agencies, and internal
recruiting departments is on its last legs and cannot deliver the desired results.
Transactional recruiting that is in use today by the
majority of search firms and internal recruiters has been around for more than
50 years. There have been some marginal
improvements in terms of technology – the introduction of web-based
psychological or behavioral profiling, facsimile transmissions, computerized
searchable databases, email, videoconferencing, and Skype, for example, but the
basic candidate recruiting process and business model remain the same. Recruiting is one of only two or three
industries that have not experienced a business transformation. And if clients and their recruiters need any proof that change is needed, look at the various studies that show that the "stick rate" -- the average tenure of someone recruited from outside an organization -- is unacceptable: 40 percent of senior level candidates leave, are pushed out, or are fired within 18 months, according to a Heidrick & Struggles internal review of 20,000 of their searches (Financial Times, March, 2009). This is not an anomaly at Heidrick. Other surveys show similar results at all levels, in all industries.
The time has come for the recruiting industry to seriously
look at its weaknesses. Transactional
recruiting models must be replaced with more accountable, outcome-oriented
processes with consequences for those who provide the service.
The following statements characterize the transactional
model:
- Order taking orientation
- Lack of understanding of the costs of failure
- Divided responsibility (identification and
selection)
- Lack of transparency
- Poor communication with candidates
- Don’t rock the boat mentality
- Marginal accountability
- No financial fear of failure
- In summary:
NO PARTNERSHIP
There can be no partnership without shared risks, which
includes financial responsibility. This is one key element that distinguishes transactional from transformational recruiting. While
transactional recruiting is not an ideal process for the challenges we face,
there will be no rush to change. Why
change? There is currently no economic
incentive to do so.
But the storm clouds of change are forming.
On Wednesday I will introduce you to a new approach,
transformational recruiting, that will produce superior results in these
challenging times.
Next: Transformational
Recruiting
Seed Newsvine
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.