Proactive Staffing: A Case Study

Question 1: Accepting turnover and replacing staff versus retaining talent

Organizations are constantly having to face multiple challenges to keep up a competitive advantage, in order to survive and function (Phillips & Gully, 2015). One challenge an organization will face is having to choose between regularly replacing staff and accepting turnover rates or choosing to retain talent. Put forward, both these choices are beneficial, costly and time-consuming (Bryant & Allen, 2013). However, it is highly beneficial to an organization to alternatively retain existing talent rather than accepting and having to replace employees. Organizations who focus on retaining talent often result in lower turnover rates; increase in productivity, loyalty and

More significantly, proactive staffing is concerned with identifying and improving practices and situations that can be seen as problematic (Phillips & Gully, 2015). Proactive staffing is also concerned with the success of its employees as it ties to the success of the organization (Bryant & Allen, 2013). Organizations who strive to be successful often hire top talent, as they can run and assist the goals of an organization (Bryant & Allen, 2013; Phillips & Gully, 2015). By actively recruiting top talent organization often save financially as no extra training programs may be required as the individual is already qualified, thereby saving time and money at the organization expense (Brundage & Koziel, 2010; Phillips & Gully, 2015). Another advantage of obtaining top talent is that it creates a competitive environment whereby existing employees productivity can increase in an order to receive recognition and be given the opportunity to grow (Brundage & Koziel, 2010). However, by only obtaining external top talent existing employees may be negatively affected, for example, employees may be demotivated if organizations only recruit external top talent, thus, resulting in counterproductive employees (Self & Self,

Reactive staffing is concerned with responding to a situation that has already occurred in which the organization has not been prepared. Additionally, an organization based on reactive staffing does not consider any future staffing issues that may arise within the organization (Phillips & Gully, 2015). This can be problematic, for example, if an organization is rushed to fill a job position, the organization could make the mistake of hiring the wrong individual for the job resulting in counter productivity and or the organization could face legal action if candidates may feel they were discriminated against through the recruitment process (Self & Self, 2014; Phillips & Gully,