D354 Task 1 Labor Shortage Analysis Example

Seventy Days to Fill and Still Empty: Analyzing Why a Composite Orthopedic Device Maker Cannot Attract Qualified Engineers and Quality Technicians

Student Name

School of Business, Western Governors University

D354: Talent Acquisition, Task 1

Course Instructor

Month Day, Year

Seventy Days to Fill and Still Empty: Analyzing Why a Composite Orthopedic Device Maker Cannot Attract Qualified Engineers and Quality Technicians

The Organization and the Shortage

Ridgeway Orthopedics, a composite manufacturer of knee and hip implant components, employs 620 people in a city of about 90,000 in the upper Midwest. Demand for its products has grown 15% a year, and the company plans to add a second production line. Hiring has not kept up. Over the past year, Ridgeway posted 48 openings for manufacturing engineers, quality engineers and quality technicians and filled 26. Average time to fill was 71 days for technicians and 104 days for engineers. Eleven offers were declined, most often for positions at larger companies in two cities within a two-hour drive. Unfilled quality roles have slowed inspection and delayed shipments, and the second line's launch has been pushed back six months.

This analysis examines the causes of the shortage, separating those in the external labor market from those inside the company, so that the recruitment plan can focus where Ridgeway has control.

How the Causes Were Identified

The analysis drew on four kinds of evidence. Applicant tracking data showed how many people applied to each posting, how long each stage took and where candidates dropped out. Short phone interviews with nine candidates who declined offers or withdrew asked what influenced their decisions. A review of competitors' postings and public salary data compared Ridgeway's requirements and pay with those of the three employers that most often hired its candidates. Finally, a sample of 60 online reviews of Ridgeway from the past three years was read and coded by theme. Combining these sources guards against guessing: for instance, managers believed pay was the main reason for declined offers, but candidates more often mentioned the slow process and uncertainty about the company, with pay mattering mainly for experienced engineers.

External Causes

The regional labor market is small. The local university graduates about 40 engineers a year across all disciplines, and larger employers recruit heavily there. Experienced quality professionals in medical devices are scarce, because the industry's regulatory requirements demand specialized knowledge that general manufacturing experience does not provide. Unemployment in the region is low, so qualified candidates are usually employed and must be persuaded to move. Finally, the city's appeal is uneven: housing is affordable, but candidates from larger cities worry about job options for partners and fewer amenities.

These causes are real but largely outside Ridgeway's control. They mean the company cannot rely on a steady flow of applicants responding to postings; it must attract candidates who are not looking.

Internal Causes

The internal causes are more important, because the company can change them.

Inflated requirements: postings for quality technicians require a bachelor's degree and a quality certification that costs about $1,000 and takes months of study, although the company's own top-performing technicians include several without degrees. Requirements that exceed the job shrink the applicant pool without improving quality.

A weak employer brand: Ridgeway is well known to surgeons but not to engineers. Its careers page is a list of openings with no information about the work, products or people. Online employee reviews average 2.9 of 5, with repeated complaints about mandatory overtime during a production surge two years ago and poor communication from management. Candidates who research the company find those reviews and no response from Ridgeway.

A slow, uncoordinated process: applications sit an average of 12 days before a recruiter screens them, interviews are scheduled around four different managers' calendars, and offers require three levels of approval. Strong candidates accept other offers while Ridgeway is still scheduling interviews.

Uncompetitive offers for engineers: base pay for manufacturing engineers is about 8% below regional competitors, and Ridgeway offers no relocation assistance, which matters when most engineering candidates live elsewhere.

What Research Suggests About Attraction

Research on why applicants are attracted to organizations helps prioritize among these causes. A meta-analysis of recruiting outcomes found that applicants' attraction and job choice were related to characteristics of the job and organization, recruiter behaviors, perceptions of the recruiting process and, strongly, perceived fit with the organization (Chapman et al., 2005). Ridgeway's weaknesses map directly onto these factors: its postings describe requirements rather than the job, its process signals disorganization and its brand gives candidates little basis for judging fit. Research on employer branding frames an organization's reputation as an employer in terms of brand equity, the knowledge and associations candidates hold about it, which shapes whether they consider applying at all (Theurer et al., 2018). For a company with little visibility and negative reviews, improving that knowledge is a precondition for recruiting passive candidates.

Workforce Planning Implications

The second production line will require 14 additional quality and manufacturing roles within 18 months, on top of replacing about 10% annual turnover in these roles. At current fill rates, Ridgeway would fall further behind. The company also has an internal source it has not used: 60 production associates, some of whom could become quality technicians with training, if the degree requirement were removed. Filling roles internally also helps retention, since people who move up see a future at the company, and a century of turnover research identifies perceived opportunities, both inside and outside the organization, among the forces that shape whether employees stay (Hom et al., 2017). Recruiting and retention therefore have to be planned together: every quality technician who leaves in the first year adds another opening to a list the company already cannot fill.

Priorities for the Recruitment Plan

The analysis sets five priorities. First, rewrite job requirements to reflect what each job needs, removing the degree requirement for technicians and making certification something the company pays for after hire. Second, build an employer brand that tells engineers what the work is like and responds honestly to online reviews. Third, shorten time to hire by setting service standards for screening, interviewing and approval. Fourth, make engineering offers competitive with pay adjustments and relocation assistance. Fifth, create internal pathways from production to quality roles. Each priority addresses a cause the company controls and will be measured in the recruitment plan.

Conclusion

Ridgeway's shortage has external causes it must work around, a small regional market and scarce specialized skills, but its most important causes are internal: inflated requirements, a weak and damaged employer brand, a slow process and uncompetitive engineering offers. Because these are within the company's control, the recruitment plan can make real progress by addressing them.

References

Chapman, D. S., Uggerslev, K. L., Carroll, S. A., Piasentin, K. A., & Jones, D. A. (2005). Applicant attraction to organizations and job choice: A meta-analytic review of the correlates of recruiting outcomes. Journal of Applied Psychology, 90(5), 928-944. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.90.5.928

Hom, P. W., Lee, T. W., Shaw, J. D., & Hausknecht, J. P. (2017). One hundred years of employee turnover theory and research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102(3), 530-545. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000103

Theurer, C. P., Tumasjan, A., Welpe, I. M., & Lievens, F. (2018). Employer branding: A brand equity-based literature review and research agenda. International Journal of Management Reviews, 20(1), 155-179. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12121