The first two articles in this series (part 1 and part 2) dealt with applicant reduction strategies. While not traditionally thought of as an applicant reduction strategy, we discussed how charging fees for testing can serve to reduce the applicant pool. Reducing the applicant pool can often be desirable since there are typically cost savings involved in relation to man power needed to handle applicants as they work their way through the selection process and efficiency benefits in regard to how quickly positions can be filled.

In addition to reducing the applicant pool by eliminating applicants that are not truly interested in the position being filled, charging fees can also help off set the costs incurred in the selection process. Karen Coffee, a Human Resources Consultant, made a presentation to a large segment of California Public Sector HR representatives in 1996, which was subsequently printed in Public Personnel Management, Vol. 25 No. 2 (Summer, 1996) in an article titled “To Fee, or Not to Fee.” Despite the fact that the article is now sixteen years old, the points she made are still relevant today. In fact, as time has gone on, and more and more jurisdictions have experienced financial challenges leading to budgetary restraints, the issue of charging fees may be even more relevant today than it was then. The full text of the article is available on this site. (more…)

Building on part 1 of this series on candidate reduction strategies, today we will provide more detail regarding the use of random numbers as part of a candidate reduction strategy. We will take a closer look at the issue of charging fees for filing a job application and/or testing, which can serve as an intentional or unintentional means of reducing the applicant pool. (more…)

From time to time, the issue of candidate reduction strategies becomes the center of discussion in the Human Resources Field. In the current economic times it is not uncommon for employers to be besieged by far more applicants than necessary to fill current vacancies with well qualified candidates. In addition, many agencies are being forced to do more with less, in particular, less staff and less money. Combining these factors makes it imperative for HR shops to be efficient and this means working smarter, not harder, so appropriate candidate reduction strategies should be included with their other HR tools. (more…)