Discussion: The Recruiting Process
Discussion: The Recruiting Process
How many times have you, or has someone you know, perused jobs on Monster.com, LinkedIn or a clinical listserv? When browsing employment opportunities, what factors motivate you to apply for one position over another? Discussion: The Recruiting Process
ORDER NOW FOR COMPREHENSIVE, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPERS
As a nurse manager, it is critical that you consider the answers to questions such as these when designing your recruitment process. Identifying the approaches applicants use to find jobs can help you broaden your pool of applicants. In addition, knowing how to create accurate job descriptions to advertise for open positions can increase the chances of finding an applicant that is qualified and exhibits skills that you and your workplace desire.
In this Discussion, you examine the process in which a health care organization engages when attempting to recruit qualified and desirable job candidates. Discussion: The Recruiting Process
To prepare
Review Chapters 4 and 5 from the course text, Human Resource Management: Functions, Applications, Skill Development. What best practices can be used to identify, analyze, and describe positions within a health care setting? In addition, what considerations and factors should be taken into account when recruiting job candidates?
Reflect upon the recruitment process used in your current organization or one with which you are familiar. Then, select one setting to further investigate.
Consider questions such as the ones below to identify the recruitment methods and steps involved in searching for and attracting potential employees.
What is expected of the nurse manager in terms of recruitment?
What is expected of HR in terms of recruitment?
How are job openings posted and/or advertised?
What challenges or constraints have been experienced with regard to recruiting desirable and qualified applicants?
Submit a brief description of your selected organization’s recruitment process. Include an explanation of who is responsible for each step, how and where positions are advertised, and any unique methods used to recruit employees. Explain the effectiveness of these recruitment processes by citing authentic examples from the setting you selected and this week’s Learning Resources as appropriate.
Read a selection of your colleagues’ responses.
Respond to at least two of your colleagues on two different days using one or more of the following approaches:
Offer and support an alternative perspective on the effectiveness of a colleague’s recruitment process by citing examples from the Learning Resources or from your own research in the Walden Library.
Expand on a colleague’s posting by providing a legal perspective for why a recruitment process should be revamped or changed, based on readings and evidence.
Share an insight on similar advertising and recruitment methods your setting has used, synthesizing information to provide new perspectives.
Required Readings
Lussier, R. N., & Hendon, J. R. (2016). Human resource management: Functions, applications, & skill development (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Chapter 4, “Matching Employees and Jobs: Job Analysis and Design” (pp. 120–160)
This chapter discusses the importance of matching applicants with the “right” jobs. It highlights topics such as job analysis, job design, and job redesign. Discussion: The Recruiting Process
Chapter 5, “Recruiting Job Candidates” (pp. 192–230)
Chapter 5 provides an in-depth examination of recruitment best practices. It explores recruitment considerations and challenges along with internal and external factors that can impact recruitment efforts.
Chapter 6, “Selecting New Employees” (pp. 194–226)
This chapter explains selection processes that are commonly used to find qualified employees. The authors share many techniques used by HR professionals and nurse managers to select the “right” employee for the job.
Markey, L., & Tingle, C. (2012). Screening RNs: A change in hiring practice. Nursing Management, 43(2), 13–15.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
This article discusses the process of hiring to fill a nursing position, with a focus on Baton Rouge General Medical Center (BRGMC). At BRGMC, the interview process has one new addition: behavioral screenings for potential RNs. With this new aspect, interviewees are screened for behavior in clinical practice scenarios, equipment recognition, and skills demonstration. Discussion: The Recruiting Process
Optional Resources
Lussier, R. N., & Hendon, J. R. (2016). Human resource management: Functions, applications, & skill development (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Chapter 11, “Compensation Management”
Chapter 13, “Employee Benefits”
-
nurs_6221_discussion_rubric_1.docMSN Discussion Rubric
Criteria Levels of Achievement Outstanding Performance Excellent Performance Competent Performance Room for Improvement Poor Performance Content-Main Posting 30 to 30 points -Main posting addresses all criteria with 75% of post exceptional depth and breadth supported by credible references.
27 to 29 points -Main posting addresses all criteria with 75% of post exceptional depth and breadth supported by credible references.
24 to 26 points Main posting meets expectations. All criteria are addressed with 50% containing good breadth and depth.
21 to 23 points Main posting addresses most of the criteria. One to two criterion are not addressed or superficially addressed.
0 to 20 points Main posting does not address all of criteria, superficially addresses criteria. Two or more criteria are not addressed.
Course Requirements and Attendance 20 to 20 points -Responds to two colleagues’ with posts that are reflective, are justified with credible sources, and ask questions that extend the Discussion.
18 to 19 points -Responds to two colleagues’ with posts that are reflective, are justified with credible sources, and ask questions that extend the Discussion.
16 to 17 points Responds to a minimum of two colleagues’ posts, are reflective, and ask questions that extend the Discussion. One post is justified by a credible source.
14 to 15 points Responds to less than two colleagues’ posts. Posts are on topic, may have some depth, or questions. May extend the Discussion. No credible sources are cited.
0 to 13 points Responds to less than two colleagues’ posts. Posts may not be on topic, lack depth, do not pose questions that extend the Discussion.
Scholarly Writing Quality 30 to 30 points -The main posting clearly addresses the Discussion criteria and is written concisely. The main posting is cited with more than two credible references that adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. No spelling or grammatical errors. ***The use of scholarly sources or real life experiences needs to be included to deepen the Discussion and earn points in reply to fellow students.
27 to 29 points -The main posting clearly addresses the Discussion criteria and is written concisely. The main posting is cited with more than two credible references that adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. No spelling or grammatical errors.
24 to 26 points -The main posting clearly addresses the Discussion criteria and is written concisely. The main posting is cited with a minimum of two current credible references that adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. Contains one to two spelling or grammatical errors.
21 to 23 points -The main posting is not clearly addressing the Discussion criteria and is not written concisely. The main posting is cited with less than two credible references that may lack credibility and/or do not adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
0 to 20 points -The main posting is disorganized and has one reference that may lack credibility and does not adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition or has zero credible references. Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
Professional Communication Effectiveness 20 to 20 points -Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues and response to faculty questions are answered if posed. -Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas effectively written in Standard Edited English. -Responses posted in the Discussion demonstrate effective professional communication through deep reflective discussion which leads to an exchange of ideas and focus on the weekly Discussion topic.
18 to 19 points -Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. -Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas effectively written in Standard Edited English. -Responses posted in the Discussion demonstrate effective professional communication through deep reflective discussion which leads to an exchange of ideas and focus on the weekly Discussion topic. -Responses are cited with at least one credible reference per post and a probing question that extends the Discussion. Adheres to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. No spelling or grammatical errors.
16 to 17 points -Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. -Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas effectively written in Standard Edited English. -Responses posted in the Discussion demonstrate effective professional communication through deep reflective discussion which leads to an exchange of ideas and focus on the weekly Discussion topic. -Responses are cited with at least one credible and/or contain probing questions that extends the Discussion. Adheres to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. May have one to two spelling or grammatical errors.
14 to 15 points -Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues. -Provides opinions that may not be concise or ideas not effectively written in Standard Edited English. -Responses posted in the Discussion may lack effective professional communication that does not extend the Discussion, leads to an exchange of ideas and/or not focused on the weekly Discussion topic. -Responses are not cited and/or do not contain a probing question. May not adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. May have more than two spelling or grammatical errors.
0 to 13 points -Communication may lack professional tone or be disrespectful to colleagues. -Provides opinions that may not be concise or ideas not effectively written in Standard Edited English -Responses posted in the Discussion lack effective professional communication through discussion that does not extend the Discussion, do not lead to an exchange of ideas and/or not focused on the weekly Discussion topic. -Responses are not cited and do not contain a probing question. May not adhere to the correct format per the APA Manual 6th Edition. May have multiple spelling or grammatical errors.
Timely Submission 0 to 0 points All criteria met: Initial post submitted on time. Response to two peer initial posts. Response on 3 separate days.
-5 to 0 points 5 points deducted for responding to less than two peers or 5 points deducted for responding less than three days.
-10 to -5 points 5 points deducted for responding to less than two peers and 5 points deducted for responding less than three days.
-10 to -10 points 10 points deducted for Initial post submitted late.
-20 to -15 points Initial post submitted late and 5 points deducted for responding to less than two peers and/ or 5 points deducted for responding less than three days.
© 2016 Laureate Education, Inc. Page 4 of 4