Staffing.org Releases Research Review for Recruiters Looking for Best Staffing Research

The Q2 Edition provides summaries of selected, new research from: Creelman Lambert, KellyOCG, Aberdeen, i4cp, TATA, Mercer, Harvard Business School, Boston Consulting Group and Ernst & Young.
According to Staffing.org, “search engines can’t find the research CHROs want. Search engines are useful but not for locating good research.” It gives five reasons why:
- Most of what they provide are lists of materials: vendors’ content marketing pieces, magazine articles and blog posts.
- Corporate staffing activities lack a common language. Great material can be tagged in different ways, which each algorithm interprets differently.
- Search algorithms do a poor job evaluating quality. If a useful piece of research does not receive many hits, it will appear further down in search results.
- Algorithms also do not know how time affects relevance or which sources are the most reputable.
- And they can’t find material that is hidden behind a membership or registration page.
The Q2 issues is also included with a research membership with Staffing.org.
