Staffing.org Releases Quarterly Research Review

Staffing.org releases a new product: the Quarterly Research Review Q1, a catalogue of the best information in the staffing industry.

  • Share on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on LinkedInShare on PinterestEmail a friend
Quarterly Research Review

Quarterly Research Review

(PRWEB) June 12, 2014

Staffing.org, a leading staffing research company, releases its newest product, the Quarterly Research Review, to help recruiters sort through the best research from the more than 125 major sources they monitor.

This review of noteworthy research is intended to help recruiting executives easily access the information they need for benchmarking, proposal writing and strategizing.

In addition to their own research, Staffing.org regularly reviews research published by others — roughly ten studies per quarter. They collect these reviews, organize them topically and publish them in catalogue form. The catalogue is cumulative - over time it will eventually list all the best material from companies like Bernhard Hodes Group, Towers Watson, IBM Institute for Business Value, Silkroad, Gallup, Watson Wyatt, PriceWaterhouseCoopers, Orca Eyes, and CedarCrestone.

The First Quarter issue of the Quarterly Research Review is available now at Staffing.org. This new review/catalogue is also included in Staffing.org’s Research Membership.

When authoritative current research is needed, often on short notice, locating it is time-consuming and frustrating for recruiting execs with little time to read research and internet searches that prove disappointing.

According to Staffing.org, search engines can’t always find the research recruiters want. Search engines are useful but not for locating good research. There are 5 reasons why:
1.    Most of what they provide are lists of materials we call “research lite” — vendors’ content marketing pieces, magazine articles and blog posts.
2.    Corporate staffing activities lack a common language. Great material can be tagged in different ways, which each algorithm interprets differently.
3.    Search algorithms do a poor job evaluating quality. A brilliant piece of research will often appear far down in the search results.
4.    Their algorithms generally don’t know how time affects relevance or which sources are the most reputable.
5.    Search engines typically can’t find material that’s hidden behind a membership or registration page.

About Staffing.org
Staffing.org is a staffing research, advisory and consulting firm that has provided benchmark, best practice and thought leadership advice to hundreds of clients worldwide since 1998.


Contact

Follow us on: Contact's Twitter