The decision to hire is usually born from an existing need to accomplish a task. Frequently, tasks requiring subject matter experts need to be completed and often within a stipulated timeframe. Task in hand, decision-makers lobby together to put forward the best plan of action. The round-robin of questions commence to ensure the best plan is executed efficiently.
‘Is this a continuous need?... Do we have the resources internally to accomplish this?... Even if we do have these resources, are we able to allocate our resources to this task?... What does our budget look like?... And our timeline?... Do we even have enough time?’
These are just a few of the questions explored as employers start the decision-making process to onboard an employee or a consultant.
What’s the big difference really?
An employee is an individual who works in the service of another individual or organization under an expressed or implied contract of hire, under which the employer has the right to control the details of work performance (Black's Law Dictionary). Consultants, however, while also working in the service of another individual, are usually hired to improve specific operations, solve specific problems, develop specific strategies all within a specific start and end date. They can be employed across many industries and organizations (even at the same time) but typically require specialized knowledge of the field in which they work. Consultants while hired for the short term are still able to provide outcomes with long-term impact.
So, the question still stands, who do I need?
In making the hiring decision all aspects of the organization’s needs and available resources must be taken into consideration.
When an employee is hired, the organization has the advantage of being able to completely control and direct the employee’s work during their scheduled day. The employer is able to maximize the potential of the individual by shifting tasks as new and competing priorities arise daily. As a part of the team, employees work to achieve the overall vision and mission of the group. This advantage however may become a disadvantage as competing priorities result in choices being made regarding which task to address first. Consultants have one priority – the completion of the specific task they were contracted to execute. As shifts occur within the organizations, the consultants, through the legal obligation to complete their duties, remain steadfast in achieving their end goal.
Cost is often a major variable weighed in this decision. While the initial payout to the consultant may seem like a substantial cost upfront, by hiring consultants, organizations are able to achieve long term savings. The continuous costs associated with having a full-time employee are avoided. These include onboarding costs, tax obligations, employee benefits, initial and continuous training as well as other human resource costs, which may differ across the specific job role. It is important to note that consultants are primarily paid based on specific deliverables. If the defined deliverables are not met consultants are not compensated. Thus incentivizing the need for the consultant to not only remain on task but to also do so at a high quality. Does the benefit outweigh the cost? The answer to this question is important as the decision is made.
The type of supervision necessary for the task is also a key consideration as the decision of hiring an employee vs. consultant is made. If the activity is deemed as one needing a high level of supervision, with the employer needing to control details such as the hours of work, the tools, software, and equipment used, then perhaps an employee may be the best bet. Since consultants are professionals i.e. subject matter experts needing limited supervision, a task deemed by the employer as one requiring high levels of close supervision during defined business hours may be better suited for an employee.
But, who do I need?
There is no one answer to this question. The question has to be reviewed on a case by case basis and the answer determined based on the employer’s needs. And, if after assessing the case the decision is still not apparent then perhaps a hybrid employment structure should be considered. There may be recurring tasks that need the proficiency of a subject matter expert who only focuses on that deliverable. The employee may not necessarily need to participate in the overall or daily functioning of the organization but will over time be essential in the fulfillment of a continuous need. Monthly data analysis? Perhaps you need input on the design, implementation, and dissemination of evaluations, special studies, and assessments? A monitoring and evaluation (M&E) specialist would be ideal. But onboarding a full-time M&E specialist with all the associated costs of an employee may not be cost-effective in the specific organization’s structure. However, a hybrid specialist contracted to execute all the organization’s related M&E tasks may be the ideal mix of both worlds for that specific organization. A novel solution to a continuous dilemma. At EvaluCore we are open to having this discussion with employers to assist them in arriving at these decisions. We are flexible in our approach and delivery of services. Contact us today and let’s discuss who you truly need.
Comments