Raport HR Outlook 3rd Quarter 2011

Romanian Human Resources Outlook
November 2011, Bucharest
Agenda
Methodology
Key Findings
Human Resources Strategy
Learning and Development
25
Performance Management
32
Recruitment and Selection
36
Sample Characteristics
45
Appendix
49
Page 2
Methodology
Research method
B2B Survey
Target population
HR Department employees and General Managers
Data collection technique

Computer Assisted Web Interviews
Sample size : 129 respondents

-
HR Strategy:
Learning and Development:
Performance Management:
Recruitment and Selection:
69 respondents
82 respondents
101 respondents
96 respondents
Fieldwork
2nd of December,2011 - 4th of January, 2012
Back to Agenda
Page 3
Q3/ 2011 vs. Q3/ 2010

Overview
Focus on the usage of existing resources
through:
Performance management
Training
More companies with

learning and
development budget
Senior
Middle
Coaching and mentoring
Coaching and mentoring
Training on the job
Training on the job

E-learning
Entry
Classical trainings
Training on the job
More companies with

performance
management activities
Higher usage of external

funds (European funds)
Specialists
Training on the job
Higher orientation towards the development of Soft skills

(Communication/ relation/ team work/ leadership skills)
Higher importance of price when choosing external

training programs
Page 4
More companies use

promotion as a method
to retain people
Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011

Overview
HR BUDGETS
Slight
decrease
HR logistics activities
Recruitment budgets
Leasing
Lower budget
Lower budgets due to 2 possible causes:
Lower collaboration with

external consultants
In house recruitment (use internal sources)
Part of the companies

renounced to hiring personnel
through leasing
Lower intensity (recruit, but fewer

employees)
Fewer Entry level positions

occupied in this way
Page 5
Q3/ 2011
Key Findings
HR Strategy
This was a third quarter focused on trainings and performance management programs: more companies with budgets for
learning and development and more companies which make performance management in comparison with the same quarter in
2010.
Recruiting passed in a secondary plan. It is still the activity performed by most of the companies, but it is either made with a
lower intensity (companies still recruit, but less) or they perform this activity internally, as the budget dedicated to this activity
lowered compared to the previous quarter.
The budget for specific HR logistics was lower. Additionally, almost half of the companies did not cooperate with external
consultants for this type of activities, while none of them increased cooperation with external consultants.
Overall, HR budgets are slightly decreasing in Q3/ 2011, in comparison to Q2/ 2011.
As compared to Q3/ 2010, the number of companies which do performance management activities increased.
Fewer companies include formal meetings with the management and other financial benefits (e.g. bonuses) among their
retention techniques than in Q2/ 2011. Compared to last year, however, promotions become more popular, almost half of the
companies using this method.
Page 6
Q3/ 2011
Key Findings
More companies had a dedicated budget for trainings in Q3/ 2011 then in Q3/ 2010. Moreover, the usage of external funds for
financing learning and development activities has increased since last year.
For 6 out of 10 companies, the average amount spent for learning and development per employee was less than 200 Euro.
Half of the companies succeeded to spent the entire allocated budget.
Internal and external training remain the most popular methods used for the development of the employees, but this quarter
we see a clearer differentiation between the focus on hard and soft skills. Companies seek to develop the communication and
other soft skills to a higher extent, while fewer focus on the technical skills.
The usage of coaching and mentoring programs for the development of Senior and Middle level employees is increasing in Q3/
2011, compared to the same quarter in 2010. At the same time, companies use to a lower extent training on the job for these
positions. Also fewer companies offer e-learning programs to Middle level employees, in Q3/ 2011 then in Q3/ 2010.
In comparison with last year, companies tend to train Specialists and Entry level employees on the job to a higher extent.
Also, more companies choose to offer classical trainings for Entry level positions, as their number increased since Q3/2010, up to
half of the companies.
In the choice of the external consultants used for learning and development, price is gaining importance.
Page 7
Q3/ 2011
Key Findings
There is a significant difference between the number of companies which hired employees in leasing system in Q2/ 2011 and
those which used this alternative for hiring personnel in Q3/ 2011. In Q3 their number decreased from 4 out of 10 companies to
2 out of 10. The drop comes from a lower hiring of Entry level staff through this method.
Specialists recruiting through job fairs increased since Q2/ 2011, more companies using this source for external recruiting.
Page 8
Human Resources Strategy
Back to Agenda
HR Activities Conducted in 2010-2011

Scale: 10-95!
90.9
90
80
84.7
82.0
81.9
80.8
75.5
89.7
85.9
80.6
75.8
77.4
70.3
70
66.7
84.7
83.8
82.8
82.8
70.4
69.4
71.8
66.7
67.5
66.8
63.7
60
50
87.7
88.4
Recruiting
Training and professional

development
(training, coaching etc)
Specific HR logistics (certificate
management, work permit etc.)
Remuneration activities (here
are included also the bonuses
found in the HR budget)
49.2
50.8
Internal communication
40
31.4
27.7
30
25.5
22.9
20
20.1
23.3
24.4
30.2
27.9
29.0
23.3
25.9
Consultancy for Human

Resources process and systems
development
Organizational research studies
20.8
Litigations/compensation
12.7
10
Q3/2010 (N*=91)
Q4/2010 (N*=87)
Q1/2011 (N*=44)
Q2/2011 (N*=70)
Q3/2011 (N*=69)
Significant differences towards corresponding quarter of last year
*Base: Respondents that are responsible for HR strategies in their companies and who evaluated Human Resources strategy their companies
B 3. Which of the following HR activities have been conducted within your organization in the 3rd quarter/2011?
Page 10
HR Budget
Scale: 10-60!
60
52.4
50
0 5000 Euro
43.7
45.5
43.9
41.8
40
35.5
30
40.5
5001 20 000 Euro
31.9
28.8
26.3
27.3
24.4
20
More than 20 000 Euro
17.8
21.3
19.0
10
Q3/2010 (N*=58)
Q4/2010 (N*=60)
Q1/2011 (N*=31)
Q2/2011 (N*=48)
Q3/2011 (N*=50)
*Base: Organizations that performed HR activities during the respective quarter

B 5. Approximately, what was your HR budget in the 3rd quarter/2011? HR budget does not include the employees wages.
Page 11
Effectively Used HR Budget

Scale: 10-60!
60
53.5
49.5
50
46.9
More than the

estimated one
43.1
41.9
40
38.5
36.4
31.5
31.2
Equal with the

estimated one
28.6
30
25.7
20
Less than the estimated

one
21.7
17.9
19.1
14.7
10
Q3/2010 (N*=64)
Q4/2010 (N*=64)
Q1/2011 (N*=34)
Q2/2011 (N*=60)
*Base: Organizations that performed HR activities during the respective quarter

B5a. As compared to the estimated HR budget in the 3rd quarter/2011, the consumed budged was ....
Page 12
Q3/2011 (N*=54)
Dynamics of HR Budget
2nd quarter/2011
%
Recruiting
N**Q2/2011=46
N**Q3/2011=51
Training and professional development (training,

coaching etc)
N**Q3/2011=59
N**Q2/2011=57
N**Q2/2011=38
N**Q3/2011=40
N**Q3/2011=16!
N**Q2/2011=21!
Consultancy for Human Resources process and

systems development
5.0
21.9
12.1
12.7
(%)
38.5
22.8
33.5
22.9
26.4
10.8
9.0 10.0
5.3
16.9
14.8
14.4
N**Q2/2011=25!
N**Q3/2011=23!
3.0
13.8
Specific HR logistics (certificate management, work

permit etc.)
N**Q2/2011=38
N**Q3/2011=36
7.5 14.7
16.0 2.5
N**Q3/2011=19!
N**Q2/2011=18!
15.5
5.3
N**Q2/2011=36
N**Q3/2011=30
! Treat data with caution due to small base size!

*Base: Organizations that had a HR budget in the respective quarter
2.3
3.7
18.9
17.2
Has
decreased
23.7
4.3
15.9
3.4
7.2
-13.5
27.7
6.0
2.4
6.2 14.0
13.7
1.0
5.6
29.3
8.6 12.9
N**Q3/2011=48
N**Q2/2011=42
0.9
11.6
17.1
18.1
Remuneration activities (here are included also the

bonuses found in the HR budget)
3rd quarter/2011
12.2
0.7
38.9
Has
increased
36.5
7.8
= %Increase %Decrease
Significant differences towards previous quarter (level of confidence 95%)
B 2. For each of the following HR activities, would you say that, comparing to the 2nd quarter/2011, in the 3rd quarter/2011, your allocated budget has
increased, remained the same or has decreased? HR budget does not include the employees wages.
Page 13
HR Budget Distribution
N*Q3/2010=70
N*Q4/2010=62
N*Q1/2011=37
N*Q2/2011=62
N*Q3/2011=56
0%
Q3/2010
Q4/2010
Recruiting
Q1/2011
Q2/2011
Q3/2011
Q3/2010
Training and
professional
development
Q1/2011
Q3/2010
Performance
management
Q4/2010
Q1/2011
Q2/2011
Q3/2011
Q3/2010
Litigations/
compensation
Q4/2010
Q1/2011
Q2/2011
Q3/2011
Q3/2010
Consultancy for
Human Resources
process and systems
development
18.9
26.7
12.6
27.0
17.1
21.3
9.6
11.8
Q2/2011 5.1
Q3/2011 2.0
Q4/2010
Q4/2010
Q1/2011
Q2/2011
Q3/2011
1-20%
more than 20%
56.4
24.7
61.6
67.0
49.8
60.4
11.6
20.4
23.1
22.4
28.0
49.4
47.8
45.0
49.0
42.0
57.6
41.2
40.2
35.3
73.3
74.0
76.3
73.1
68.7
76.8
71.5
63.2
60.6
62.9
50.7
41.0
40.5
49.9
49.0
50.8
7.2
1.6
14.4
7.0
8.9
22.9
3.8
20.7
5.4
23.7
23.3
3.5
25.9
5.3
21.9
1.3
25.2
3.3
32.1
4.7
33.3
6.1
33.9
3.2
40.8
44.4
52.8
55.8

B 1. How was the HR budget distributed in the 3rd quarter/2011 between each of the following activities? HR budget does not include the employees wages.
Page 14
HR Budget Distribution
N*Q3/2010=70
N*Q4/2010=62
N*Q1/2011=37
N*Q2/2011=62
N*Q3/2011=56
0%
Remuneration
Q3/2010
26.9
Q4/2010
27.6
Q3/2011
Q3/2010
Specific HR logistics
Organizational
research studies
18.2
32.6
45.6
27.2
36.2
39.7
33.2
33.1
61.4
Q1/2011
39.6
5.4
53.4
6.3
50.6
35.8
9.8
55.3
43.7
8.8
54.3
1.9
Q3/2010
70.9
26.7
Q4/2010
69.9
30.1
80.7
Q1/2011
Q3/2010
Q4/2010
Q1/2011
Q2/2011
Q3/2011
34.0
74.8
41.1
23.1
57.5
52.9
43.4
41.7
48.0
2.3
19.3
66.0
Q2/2011
Q3/2011
Internal
communication
48.8
35.5
40.3
Q3/2011
35.7
23.6
Q4/2010
Q2/2011
more than 20%
37.4
31.9
Q1/2011
Q2/2011
1-20%
43.0
2.1
1.4
4.1
56.6
56.2
49.8
2.1
2.2
*Base: Respondents that are responsible for HR strategies in their companies and who evaluated Human Resources strategy their companies
B 1. How was the HR budget distributed in the 3rd quarter/2011 between each of the following activities? HR budget does not include the employees wages.
Page 15
Cooperation with External Consultants in

Q3/2011 vs. Q2/2011
%
Recruiting
Q3 N*=59
Training and professional development

Q2 N*=65
Q3 N*=58
Q2 N*=46
Q3 N*=48
Q2 N*=18!
Consultancy for Human Resources process

and systems development
Q3 N*=20

5.3
5.2
22.3
12.0
11.7
3.6
17.0
4.2
Q3 N*=57
5.1
24.0
14.0
17.2
13.6
12.2
We
We
We
We
We
21.6
37.7
36.6
48.8
27.3
20.6
19.2
45.7
21.7
30.5
11.2
15.2
28.0
15.4
21.1
27.8
22.5
6.0
18.1
14.5
15.4
3.3
31.7
19.6
9.7
39.2
5.8
19.6
36.5
39.4
32.0
Q2 N*=18!
10.2
28.8
18.8
10.9
48.4
43.0
23.1
10.2
23.1
34.9
11.0
4.1
47.1
25.0
6.0
7.4
Q2 N*=60
38.6
28.7
21.5
5.3
16.3
32.8
12.9
Q3 N*=56
Q2 N*=47
24.9
47.9
8.7
2.9
Q3 N*=45
Other Activities category was not

included due to insufficient base size
17.0
6.0
Q2 N*=56
Q3 N*=14!
8.4
Q2 N*=20!
Q3 N*=14!
Remuneration activities (here are included

also the bonuses found in the HR budget)
14.9
Q2 N*=62
14.9
5.6
21.3
20.9
20.0
30.3
28.3
29
35.7
45.9
cooperated with external consultants in a lower extent

cooperated with external consultants in the same extent
cooperated with external consultants in a higher extent
did not cooperate with external consultants in the previous quarter
did not cooperate with external consultants in the current quarter
! Treat data with caution

due to small base size!
*Base: Organizations that had a HR budget in the respective quarter and conducted HR activities during this period
B 4. To what extent did you cooperate with external consultants/experts for the following activities in the 3rd quarter/2011 comparing to the 2nd quarter/2011?
Page 16
HR Budget Priorities in Q3/2011

LOW POPULARITY
HIGH BUDGET
HIGH POPULARITY
HIGH BUDGET
LOW POPULARITY
LOW BUDGET
HIGH POPULARITY
LOW BUDGET
Decreased/ Increased
in Q3/2011 as compared to Q2/2011
B 1. How was the HR budget distributed in the 3rd quarter/2011 between each of the following activities? HR budget does not include the employees wages./ B 3. Which of
the following HR activities have been conducted within your organization in the 3rd quarter/2011? B 2. For each of the following HR activities, would you say
that, comparing to the 2nd quarter/2011, in the 3rd quarter/2011, your allocated budget has increased, remained the same or has decreased?
Page 17
Recruiting
1st Rank by Popularity: 87.7%
%
Q2/2011
N*=46
Dynamics of HR budget in
Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
Q3/2011
N*=51
(%)
5.0
21.9
33.5
38.5
22.8
Has
decreased
0.9
Has
increased
Recruiting within the HR

Budget Distribution
IT Systems Usage for Recruiting
T2b%
100
80
40.7
60
36.6
40
32.0
20
20
0
Q4/2010
(N*=67)
1% - 20%
80
46.3
Q3/2010
(N*=78)
0%
100
55.0
60
40
Recruiting
Q1/2011
(N*=38)
Q2/2011
(N*=62)
27.0
20.4
11.6
Q3/2010
(N*=70)
Q3/2011
(N*=60)
60.4
49.8
26.7
24.7
18.9
67.0
61.6
56.4
More than 20%
12.6
Q4/2010
(N*=62)
Q1/2011
(N*=37)
22.4
23.1
Q2/2011
(N*=62)
17.1
Q3/2011
(N*=56)
%
Cooperation with External Consultants
in Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
Q2/2011
N*=62
Q3/2011
N*=59
14.9
8.4
17.0
We
We
We
We
We
24.9
5.3
5.2
22.3
16.3
38.6
47.1

did not cooperate with external consultants in the 4th quarter
did not cooperate with external consultants in the 1st quarter

**Base: Respondents that are responsible for HR strategies in their companies and who evaluated Human Resources strategy their companies
B 3, B 2, B 6, B 1, B 4
Page 18
Training and Professional Development

2nd Rank by Popularity: 84.7%
%
Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
Q2/2011
N*=59
12.1
Q3/2011
N*=57
12.7
(%)
10.8
22.9
26.4
Has
decreased
13.7
Has
increased
Training within the HR

Budget Distribution
IT Systems Usage for Training
T2b%
Training
100
100
1% - 20%
More than 20%
80
80
60
40.8
40
20
0%
34.9
60
26.7
40
29.9
21.2
0
Q3/2010
(N*=74)
20
Q4/2010
(N*=69)
Q1/2011
(N*=33)
Q2/2011
(N*=64)
47.8
49.4
50.7
28.0
41.0
9.6
21.3
11.8
40.5
49.9
49.0
45.0
49.0
5.1
2.0
0
Q3/2010
(N*=70)
Q3/2011
(N*=59)
Q4/2010
(N*=62)
Q1/2011
(N*=37)
Q2/2011
(N*=62)
Q3/2011
(N*=56)
%
in Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
Q2/2011
N*=65
Q3/2011
N*=58
6.0
47.9
8.7
32.8
We
We
We
We
We
25.0
28.7
10.2
10.2
10.9
19.6


B 3, B 2, B 6, B 1, B 4
Page 19
Specific HR Logistics
3rd Rank by Popularity: 83.8%
%
Q2/2011
N*=38
Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
(%)
7.5 14.7
Q3/2011
N*=36
16.0
7.2
-13.5
2.5
Has
decreased
Has
increased
IT Systems Usage for

Specific HR Logistics within the HR

Budget Distribution
T2b%
100
80
67.6
51.7
60
40
100
80
57.0
40
47.0
20
20
0
Q4/2010
(N*=65)
Q1/2011
(N*=30)
Q2/2011
(N*=61)
61.4
60
54.6
Q3/2010
(N*=73)
0%
33.2
5.4
Q3/2010
(N*=70)
Q3/2011
(N*=58)
1% - 20%
More than 20%
50.6
39.6
53.4
40.3
6.3
9.8
Q4/2010
(N*=62)
Q1/2011
(N*=37)
55.3
54.3
35.8
8.8
Q2/2011
(N*=62)
43.7
1.9
Q3/2011
(N*=56)
%
in Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
Q2/2011
N*=60
4.1
Q3/2011
N*=57
5.1
31.7
18.1
We
We
We
We
We
6.0
28.0
21.7
36.6
48.8


B 3, B 2, B 6, B 1, B 4
Page 20
Remuneration
4th Rank by Popularity: 82.8%
%
Dynamics of HR Budget in
Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
Q2/2011
N*=48
(%)
3.0 18.9
Q3/2011
N*=42
13.8
0%
3.4
17.2
Has
decreased
100
15.9
Has
increased
1% - 20%
More than 20%
80
Remuneration within the HR

Budget Distribution
60
40
20
45.6
48.8
37.4
35.7
26.9
39.7
35.5
27.6
32.6 31.9
23.6
33.1
27.2
36.2
18.2
0
Q3/2010
(N*=70)
Q4/2010
(N*=62)
Q1/2011
(N*=37)
Q2/2011
(N*=62)
Q3/2011
(N*=56)
%
in Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
Q2/2011
N*=56
2.9
Q3/2011
N*=56
5.3
23.1
32.0
We
We
We
We
We
5.8
22.5
3.3
45.7
21.6
37.7


B 3, B 2, B 1, B 4
Page 21
%
Q2/2011
N*=38
Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
(%)
1.0
9.0 10.0
Q3/2011
N*=40
5.3 16.9
Has
decreased
9.6
Has
increased
IT Systems Usage for

within the HR Budget Distribution
T2b%
100
80
100
48.7
60
33.3
51.8
0%
1% - 20%
40
41.5
20
50.8
42.0
20
7.2
44.4
57.6
40.8
41.2
1.6
14.4
0
Q3/2010
(N*=43)
Q4/2010
(N*=42)
More than 20%
80
55.2
60
40
Q1/2011
(N*=31)
Q2/2011
(N*=47)
Q3/2010
(N*=70)
Q3/2011
(N*=48)
Q4/2010
(N*=62)
Q1/2011
(N*=37)
52.8
55.8
35.3
40.2
7.0
Q2/2011
(N*=62)
8.9
Q3/2011
(N*=56)
%
in Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
Q2/2011
N*=46
12.9
Q3/2011
N*=48
11.7
12.0 3.6
17.0
We
We
We
We
We
23.1
6.0
48.4
28.8
36.5


B 3, B 2, B 6, B 1, B 4
Page 22
Internal Communication
%
Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
(%)
Q2/2011
N*=36
2.4
Q3/2011
N*=30
6.2 14.0
38.9
Has
decreased
0%
100
7.8
60
40
20
57.5
41.1
1% - 20%
More than 20%
1.4
56.2
56.6
52.9
43.0
Has
increased
80
Internal Communication within

the HR Budget Distribution
36.5
43.4
49.8
48.0
41.7
4.1
2.1
2.2
0
Q3/2010
(N*=70)
Q4/2010
(N*=62)
Q1/2011
(N*=37)
Q2/2011
(N*=62)
Q3/2011
(N*=56)
%
in Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
Q2/2011
N*=47
Q3/2011
N*=45
11.2
17.2
13.6
12.2
We
We
We
We
We
5.6
30.3
28.3
35.7
45.9


B 3, B 2, B 1, B 4
Page 23
IT Systems Usage for HR Management

Activities Development
Scale: 20-80!
Top 2 boxes* %
80
67.6
60
N**Q3/2010=73
N**Q4/2010=65
N**Q1/2011=30
N**Q2/2011=61
N**Q3/2011=58
55.2
54.6
51.8
57.0
55.0
51.7
46.3
47.0
48.7
40.7
40
40.8
41.5
36.6
34.9
32.0
33.3
29.9
26.7
21.2
20
Q3/2010
Q4/2010
Q1/2011
Q2/2011
Q3/2011
N**Q3/2010=43
N**Q4/2010=42
N**Q1/2011=31
N**Q2/2011=47
N**Q3/2011=48
Recruiting
N**Q3/2010=78
N**Q4/2010=67
N**Q1/2011=38
N**Q2/2011=62
N**Q3/2011=60
Learning and development
N**Q3/2010=74
N**Q4/2010=69
N**Q1/2011=33
N**Q2/2011=64
N**Q3/2011=59
*Top 2 boxes= 4. In a high extent + 5. In a very high extent

B 6. How much did you use IT systems for developing the HR management activities in the 3rd quarter/2011 for ....?
Page 24
Back to Agenda
Learning Budget
Q2/2011
N*=44
Q3/2011
N*=43
%
39.5
48.0
200 Euro or more
Average Budget for Learning

and Development per Employee
Less than 200 Euro
60.5
52.0
Q2
Q3
Q2/2011
N*=65
Q3/2011
N*=56
The Actual Budget for Learning

and Development per Employee
vs. the Estimated Budget
26.7
55.3
53.7
19.6
19.7
Q2
Q3
Less than the

allocated one
Equal with the
allocated one
*Base: Respondents that are responsible

for HR strategies in their companies and
who evaluated learning and development in
their companies
25.1
More than the

allocated one
C 1. What was the average budget for learning and development per employee in the 3rd quarter/2011? / C 2. As compared to the first allocated budget for learning and
development in the 3rd quarter/2011, the consumed budget per employee was....
Page 26
Learning and Development Methods 1/2

%
100
86.0

Methods Used in the
Organization
77.1
70.9
80
78.0
60
61.5
20
3.9
62.0
63.4
41.5
Experiential trainings within organization

(job rotation, training on the job)
Q3/2010
(N*=117)
44.2
41.0
35.4
20.7
23.4
8.7
13.0
Q4/2010
(N*=110)
Q1/2011
(N*=50)
42.7
31.5
31.6
7.5
47.8
36.1
37.4
37.2
35.5
21.0
External trainings (conducted by external

consultants/trainers/experts )
77.1
69.8
40.4
40
Internal trainings (conducted by

colleagues within the organization)
84.1
31.3
16.9
19.2
2.8
Q2/2011
(N*=81)
15.6
5.9
Q3/2011
(N*=82)
Internal coaching and mentoring

sessions (conducted by colleagues within
the organization)
E-learning
External coaching and mentoring

sessions (conducted by external
consultants/trainers/experts )
Blended learning (refers to a mixing of
different learning environments)
MBA programs
Skills Desired to be Developed

by Training
74.4
68.0
68.1
66.4
70
68.9
68.4
Communication/ relation/ team
work/ leadership skills (Soft Skills)
67.6
66.0
Technical skills (Hard Skills )
59.0
54.8
50
*Base: Respondents that are responsible

for HR strategies in their companies and
who evaluated learning and development in
their companies
Q3/2010
(N*=117)
Q4/2010
(N*=110)
Q1/2011
(N*=50)
Q2/2011
(N*=81)
Q3/2011
(N*=82)
C 3. Which of the following methods of learning and development has been used within your organization in the 3rd quarter/2011? / C 5. Which skills did you want to
develop mostly by training in the 3rd quarter/2011?
Page 27
Learning and Development Methods 2/2
Senior Level
Middle Level
Scale: 0-60!
60
Classical trainings
53.6
39.7
Coaching / mentoring
30
20
33.7
28.4
35.1
17.8
22.4
12.1
Q3/2010
(N*=117)
5.3
7.5
Q4/2010
(N*=110)
Q1/2011
(N*=50)
15.5
13.0
2.8
9.2
8.0
5.9
7.1
Q2/2011
(N*=81)
Q3/2011
(N*=82)
60
40
34.6
30.4
20
10
17.7
13.8
0
Q3/2010
(N*=117)
MBA programs
70
60
55.9
58.9
1.0
Q4/2010
(N*=110)
10
22.7
11.6
1.3
25.1
22.2
21.0
26.0
16.4 17.4
3.4
29.0
27.6
24.4
15.9
9.7
17.9
0
Q3/2010
(N*=117)
Q4/2010
(N*=110)
14.0
13.6
Q1/2011
(N*=50)
Q1/2011
(N*=50)
Q2/2011
(N*=81)
13.9
1.8
Q2/2011
(N*=81)
E-learning
14.8
11.9 1.1
Blended learning
(refers to a mixing of
different learning
environments)
Training on the job
Q3/2011
(N*=82)
MBA programs
Classical trainings
60
Classical trainings
49.4
50
30.4
23.1
16.4
37.7
30
20
67.5
40
31.0
33.6
Entry Level
53.0
50
40
30.0
20.6
28.6
Scale: 0-60!
71.0
59.7
31.3
30
Blended learning
different learning
environments)
Training on the job
80
63.8
58.2
68.9
Specialists Level
Scale: 0-80!
Classical trainings
68.1
50
E-learning
29.3
9.6
10.3
32.9
30.7
25.4
10
80
70
50
40
Scale: 0-80!
Q3/2011
(N*=82)
E-learning
30
Blended learning
different learning
environments)
Training on the job
20
10
*Base: Respondents that are responsible for HR strategies in their companies and who
evaluated learning and development in their companies
41.0
32.0
32.1
33.9
31.6
E-learning
22.6
20.4
17.5
5.7
2.5
MBA programs
48.4
Q3/2010
(N*=117)
15.1
7.5
5.4
Q4/2010
(N*=110)
24.8
13.2
8.8
Q1/2011
(N*=50)
18.2
12.6
18.3
13.4
10.3
2.2
Q2/2011
(N*=81)
Q3/2011
(N*=82)
Blended learning
different learning
environments)
Training on the job
MBA programs

C 4. For what type of employees did you organize each of these learning and development programs in the 2nd quarter/2011?
Page 28
Average Number of Training Days per

Employee
Senior Level
Middle Level
Scale: 0-60!
60
50
70
49.0
43.8
45.7
43.6
40
30
20
Scale: 0-70!
35.5
18.0
34.9
35.2
28.0
40.6
30
6 days or more
12.6
16.6
10
0
Q4/2010
(N*=28)!
6 days or more
12.3
Q1/2011
(N*=12)!
Q2/2011
(N*=24)!
Q3/2011
(N*=20)!
Q3/2010
(N*=47)
Q4/2010
(N*=47)
Q1/2011
(N*=26)!
Specialists Level
Q3/2011
(N*=43)
Scale: 0-60!
60
60
41.9
44.7
34.7
18.9
50.7
38.6
39.2
30
20
Q2/2011
(N*=42)
Entry Level
Scale: 0-80!
40
17.8
25.9
20.3
3-5 days
0
Q3/2010
(N*=30)
50
39.5
26.9
25.5
32.0
20
10
42.7
42.8
40
3-5 days
29.5
15.9
26.3
1-2 days
48.7
47.7
50
43.8
38.2
60.8
60
1-2 days
26.7
36.3
19.0
33.0
48.1
50
1-2 days
39.2
40
40.0
39.9
30
3-5 days
16.3
48.8
40.6
20
12.7
10
6 days or more
35.0
19.5
26.7
25.0
37.2
37.1
36.2
34.2
28.8
22.4
28.6
10
1-2 days
3-5 days
6 days or more
0
Q3/2010
(N*=63)
Q4/2010
(N*=50)
Q1/2011
(N*=22)!
Q2/2011
(N*=45)
Q3/2011
(N*=46)
*Base: Respondents that are responsible for HR strategies in their companies and who
evaluated learning and development in their companies
Q3/2010
(N*=36)
Q4/2010
(N*=45)
Q1/2011
(N*=13)!
Q2/2011
(N*=33)
Q3/2011
(N*=35)
C 4a. On average, which was the number of days of training per employee in your organization in the 3rd quarter/2011, for the position of.
Page 29
Outsourcing Criteria
Scale: 45-100!
Top 2 boxes** %
95
97.6
94.8
94.3
92.9
91.9
85.0 84.2
85.0
85
75
92.2
92.6
84.3
84.1
Flexibility/Adaptation to the client's

needs
77.5
The organization's trainers
83.2
78.6
80.5
73.8
73.5
76.5
74.5
63.9
65
53.6
The prices for the offered services
61.2 61.2
62.9
55
Experience in the field that your

organization operates
67.3
67.4
62.6
56.6
The quality of the programs
58.8
59.5
58.7
The organization's reputation
50.8
The long term relationship with the
external organization
51.4
47.2
45
Q3/2010 (N*=71)
Q4/2010 (N*=66)
Q1/2011 (N*=30)
Q2/2011 (N*=65)
Q3/2011 (N*=58)
*Base: Organizations that used external trainings or coaching

**Top 2 boxes= 4. In a high extent + 5. In a very high extent
C 6. How much did the following criteria influence you in choosing the external consultant/expert for learning and development activities in the 3rd quarter/2011?
Page 30
External Funds Usage
%
100
80
Usage of External Funds
60
Yes
40
20
22.6
17.9
Q2/2011
(N*=78)
Q3/2011
(N*=78)
16.5
4.6
5.2
0
Q3/2010
(N*=113)
Q4/2010
(N*=106)
Q1/2011
(N*=49)
Q2/2011
N**=15!
Q3/2011
N**=8!
0 - 5%
5 - 20%
20 - 50%
50 - 100%
COUNT
External Funds Percentage from
Total Financing for Learning and
Development Activities

*Base: Respondents that are responsible for HR strategies in their companies and who evaluated learning and development in their companies
**Organizations that used external funds
C 7. Did you use any external funds (e.g. European Funds) for financing the learning and development activities in the 3rd quarter/2011? / C 8. Out of the total amount of
financing for the learning and development activities conducted within your organization in the 3rd quarter/2011, what percentage was represented by external funds (e.g.
European Funds) ?
Page 31
Performance Management/
Compensation and Benefits
Back to Agenda
Retention Techniques
T2B*%
80
Retention Techniques
Usage
79.1
75.7
74.1
70.3
60
62.4
34.5
35.0
30.9
29.7
20
51.5
40.8
58.7
58.8
37.2 36.8
25.4
47.0
42.0
36.6
32.3
35.3
21.6
19.1
22.0
48.4
45.3
37.6
33.6
Official recognition of their value

Promotions
42.7
38.6
Formal meetings with the

organization's management
34.0
33.1
33.4
Increasing decision-making
power
25.5
25.4
Possibility of a flexible schedule
28.6
24.2
Ensuring of a pleasant work

environment
Training/development activities
61.5
67.3
57.8
55.3
52.9
46.5
40
69.5
63.9
68.8
Scale: 0-85!
71.9
24.0
17.9
Offering other financial benefits

(e.g. bonuses)
Increasing wages
0
Q3/2010
(N*=128)
Q4/2010
(N*=112)
Q1/2011 (N*=57)
Q2/2011
(N*=100)
Q3/2011 (N*=97)
Offering of non-financial benefits

(eg. car, health insurance, etc)
%
Projects
60
Scale: 20-65!
20
40
50.6
32.1
Q3/2010
(N*=128)
47.1
36.3
Q4/2010
(N*=110)
Q1/2011
(N*=55)
Q2/2011
(N*=96)
43.1
Yes
Q3/2011
(N*=97)

*Top 2 boxes= 4. In a high extent + 5. In a very high extent
**Base: Respondents that are responsible for HR strategies in their companies and who evaluated performance management/ compensation and benefits in their companies
D 1. How much did you use the following retention techniques in the 3rd quarter/2011? / D 9. Did you implement any performance management projects in the 3rd
quarter/2011?
Page 33
Working from Home and Flexible Time

Schedule
Percentage of Employees Having the
Possibility of Working from Home
Working from Home
1-30%
Yes
100
100
80
80
60
60
40
34.3
39.3
42.4
40.2
27.1
66.3
Q3/2010
(N*=132)
Q4/2010
(N*=115)
Q1/2011
(N*=55)
Q2/2011
(N*=93)
72.8
66.2
37.6
Q3/2010
(N*=43)
Q3/2011
(N*=97)
37.7
27.2
Q4/2010
(N*=32)
Q1/2011
(N*=19)
24.2
Q2/2011
N**=32
Q2/2011
(N*=30)
1-30%
Yes
71.0
66.7
69.6
66.2
61.2
80
Q3/2011
(N*=24)
59.2
60.6
40
40
52.2
20
20
39.8
39.4
Q3/2010
(N*=81)
Q4/2010
(N*=62)
49.9
48.3
Q4/2010
(N*=115)
Q1/2011
(N*=55)
Q2/2011
(N*=96)
Q3/2011
(N*=99)
= %Increase
%Decrease
Has
increased
Dynamics of People with Flexible Schedule

in Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
Q1/2011
(N*=31)
Q2/2011
N***=56
Q3/2011
N***=55
Q2/2011
(N*=54)
Q3/2011
(N*=54)
(%)
17.9
1.9 8.7
Has
decreased
30.7
0
Q3/2010
(N*=134)
15.5
24.0
%
69.3
47.8
8.5
27.9
31 - 100%
60
60
31.4
3.5
Has
decreased
100
100
(%)
29.9
Percentage of Employees Having the

Possibility of Flexible Schedule
Flexible Schedule
Q3/2011
N**=25!
80
62.3
31 - 100%
40
20
20
60.5
Dynamics of Working from Home People

in Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
17.9
6.8
= %Increase
Has
%Decrease
increased
*Base: Respondents that are responsible for HR strategies in their companies and who evaluated performance management/ compensation and benefits in their companies
**Base: Organizations with employees that have the possibility to work from home
***Base: Organizations with employees that have the possibility of a flexible schedule
D2, D3, D4, D5, D6
Page 34
Employees' Promotion
Percentage of Employees
that were Promoted
100
80
60
51.7
59.7
54.0
52.0
0%
45.8
40
30.4
20.8
20
17.9
19.5
Q3/2010
(N*=112)
Q4/2010
(N*=93)
1 - 5%
27.8
24.3
22.7
26.4
23.7
23.2
6% or more
0
Q1/2011
(N*=53)
Q2/2011
(N*=86)
Q3/2011
(N*=84)
Change of Internal Promotions Rate

%
Q2/2011
N**=96
Q3/2011
N**=90
13.2
21.4
Has
decreased
(%)
31.3
21.4
17.9
0
Has
increased
= %Increase
%Decrease
*Base: Respondents that are responsible for HR strategies in their companies and who evaluated performance management/ compensation and benefits in their companies
(DK/NA were excluded)
**Base: Respondents that are responsible for HR strategies in their companies and who evaluated performance management/ compensation and benefits in their companies
D 7. What percentage of your employees got a promotion within your organization in the 3rd quarter/2011? / D 8. How did the rate of internal promotions change in the
3rd quarter/2011, comparing to the 4th quarter/2010?
Page 35
Back to Agenda
Recruitment Plan (1/2)

%
100
Recruiting Plan
80
76.8
64.3
64.9
62.3
71.0
60
Yes
40
20
0
Q3/10 (N*=119) Q4/10 (N*=108)
Q1/11 (N*=48)
Q2/11 (N*=90)
(%)
%
Change of Recruitment Plan in
Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
Q2/2011
N**=68
48.9
Q3/2011
N**=67
34.2
46.2
Q3/11 (N*=95)
16.9
26.4
32.5
18.8
27.4
=% Includes more employees %Includes less

employees
Includes more employees

Includes the same number of employees
Includes less employees
1st quarter/2011(N=50)
2nd quarter/2011(N=91)
77.5
Levels of Recruitment
48.3
54.3
54.3
61.6
3rd quarter/2011 (N=96)
65.5
45.5
45.2
37.2
18.3
**Base: Organizations that have recruiting

plans
*Base: Respondents that are responsible for

HR strategies in their companies and who
evaluated recruiting and selection in their
companies
Entry Level
Specialists
Middle Level
17.9
15.3
Senior/ Top Level
15.3
8.7
12.6
None
E 1. Did you have a recruiting plan in the 3rd quarter/2011 ? / E 2. As compared to the 2nd quarter/2011, your recruiting plan for the 3rd quarter/2011.... / E 3. Which of
the following levels did you recruit in the 3rd quarter/2011 ?
Page 37
Recruitment Plan (2/2)

%
Q2/2011
N*=89
Change of Employees Number

in Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2010
47.5
Q3/2011
N*=95
36.6
37.8
15.9
42.2
It has increased
20.0
It remained the same
It has decreased
%
100
80
84.3
78.2
80.6
77.8
60.6
60
Percentage of Employees Hired

in Leasing System
39.4
0%
40
21.8
22.2
Q3/2010
(N*=95)
Q4/2010
(N*=89)
20
1% or more
19.4
15.7
0
Q1/2011
(N*=41)
Q2/2011
(N*=81)
Q3/2011
(N*=85)
Significant differences towards previous quarter(level of confidence 95%)

*Base: Respondents that are responsible for HR strategies in their companies and who evaluated recruiting and selection in their companies
E 11. How did the number of your organizations employees change in the 3rd quarter/2011, comparing to the 4th quarter /2010? / E 13. Out of the total number of
employees, what percentage were hired in leasing system in the 3rd quarter/2011?
Page 38
Entry Level Recruitment (1/2)
Internal vs. External Recruitment %

NQ2/2011*=47
Internal Recruiting
External Recruiting
NQ3/2011*=45
41.2
56.5
NQ2/2011*=49 8.8
NQ3/2011*=50 1.9
49.6
9.1
41.4
47.5
2.1
NQ2/2011*=44
3.1
NQ3/2011*=48
5.0
43.7
37.4
0%
Percentage of Eligible Candidates out of Total Received CVs %
60.7
1 - 99 %
86.2
65.8
0%
100%
1 - 30 %
10.8
29.3
31 - 100 %
Average Recruitment Costs
Q2/2011
N*=26!
Q3/2011
N*=30
0 Euro
0 49Euro
22
22
Count
50 Euro or more
*Base: Organizations that used

external recruitment for - Entry Level
E 5. In order to fill in the available entry level positions, in what percentage were the internal recruiting used and in what percentage were the external recruiting used in
the 3rd quarter/2011? / E 9. Within your organization, what percentage of out of the received CVs were eligible candidates (who were selected for an interview/shortlist) for
each category of open/available positions ? / E 12. Which were the average recruiting costs for each position in your organization in the 3rd quarter/2011?
Page 39
Entry Level Recruitment (2/2)

76.4
72.9
Candidates found via employment

ads/ recruiting sites
72.2
70.9
Employees' references /internal

recommendation
41.3
36.5
Previous candidates
32.8
30.1
Internship
20.9
29.8
Job Fairs
59.5
Candidate's attitude
51.4
51.1
Candidate's matching with the

organization culture
48.5
32.9
Candidate's communication skills
47.2
31.9
Candidate's technical skills
33.4
36.8
The results gained on the test
26.9
24.5
Hiring former employees
Selecting Candidates
%
82.2
75.0
Direct/ spontaneous applications
Employment office
2nd quarter/2011(N=53) Main Criteria considered when
External Recruitment
Sources Used
%
28.3
23.6
Previous experience
27.4
7.6
20.2
20.5
19.5
Educational institutes/ Student

NGOs
15.5
13.5
Head hunting
Internal recommendations
Recruiting agencies
21.7
10.3
Other specialized courses
Workforce agencies (leasing)
21.8
Something else
2.0
*Base: Organizations that used external recruitment for - Entry Level
36.5
Highest level of education
26.7
11.2
16.2
7.0
9.4
3.3
Significant differences between Q3/2011 and Q2/2011 (level of confidence 95%)
E 4. Which were the external recruiting sources for the following levels in the 3rd quarter/2011?/E 10. Which are the main criteria that you considered when you selected
candidates for each of the following categories of open/available positions in the 3rd quarter/2011?
Page 40
Specialists Recruitment (1/2)
Internal vs. External Recruitment
NQ2/2011*=39
Internal Recruiting
External Recruiting
NQ3/2011*=33
2.0
87.0
Percentage of Eligible Candidates out of total Received CVs %
11.0
15.6
NQ2/2011*=56
84.4
NQ2/2011*=42 9.9
78.6
NQ3/2011*=34
89.1
11.5
81.6
0%
2.3
18.4
1 - 99 %
81.4
NQ3/2011*=55
0%
100%
1 - 30 %
8.6
18.6
31 - 100 %

NQ2/2011*=39
NQ3/2011*=39
14.7
85.3
23.0
0 Euro
77.0
0 - 49 Euro
50 Euro or More

external recruitment for - Specialists
E 7. In order to fill in the available specialist positions, in what percentage were the internal recruiting/ promotions used and in what percentage were the external
recruiting used in the 3rd quarter/2011? / E 9. Within your organization, what percentage of out of the received CVs were eligible candidates (who were selected for an
interview/shortlist) for each category of open/available positions ? / E 12. Which were the average recruiting costs for each position in your organization in the 3rd
quarter/2011?
Page 41
Specialists Recruitment (2/2)

External Recruitment Sources Used

%
75.9
81.7
Candidates found via employment ads/

recruiting sites
72.6
68.8

recommendation
32.0
28.6
Head hunting
28.6
22.4
Recruiting agencies
Job Fairs
Internship
2.0
18.0
9.9
14.7
8.6
13.0
79.3
57.4
56.6
58.7
39.9
43.1
Candidate's matching with

the organization culture
37.2
21.9
The results gained on the

test
30.9
22.4
Candidate's communication
skills
Educational institutes/ Student NGOs
4.8
7.0
1.3
5.5
Employment office
4.4
4.1
Something else
*Base: Organizations that used external recruitment for - Specialists
68.3
43.7
31.7
Previous candidates
Previous experience
62.8
57.2
Main Criteria Considered when

%
15.4
5.4
12.9
7.8
12.5
6.0
6.6
3.1
Significant differences between Q3/2011 and Q2/2011 (level of confidence 95%)
Page 42
Middle Level Recruitment (1/2)
Percentage of Eligible Candidates out of Total Received CVs %
Internal vs. External Recruitment %

NQ2/2011*=59
Internal Recruiting
External Recruiting
NQ3/2011*=55
30.8
64.8
30.3
NQ2/2011*=64 3.9
4.3
62.9
59.2
NQ3/2011*=59 6.3
7.5
85.2
36.9
58.3
0%
NQ2/2011*=36
6.8
35.4
1 - 99 %
84.1
NQ3/2011*=31
0%
100%
1 - 30 %
7.3
15.9
31 - 100 %
Q2/2011
N*=28!
Q3/2011
N*=23!
0 Euro
0 49Euro
22
21
Count
50 Euro or more

external recruitment for - Middle Level
E 6. In order to fill in the available middle level positions, in what percentage were the internal recruiting/ promotions used and in what percentage were the external
recruiting used in the 3rd quarter/2011? / E 9. Within your organization, what percentage of out of the received CVs were eligible candidates (who were selected for an
interview/shortlist) for each category of open/available positions ? / E 12. Which were the average recruiting costs for each position in your organization in the 3rd
quarter/2011?
Page 43
Middle Level Recruitment (2/2)
59.2

recommendation
79.0
40.8
47.1
Head hunting
Previous candidates
33.1
26.0
Recruiting agencies
38.3
24.2
17.6
8.7
13.0
8.4
4.7
8.4
5.0
6.0
Employment office
7.6
30.9
19.7
35.0
42.2
13.6
17.1
50.3
49.1

Job Fairs
Internship
53.3
50.9
49.5
52.7
81.2
80.2
Previous experience
64.8
63.9

recruiting sites

%
Something else
13.6
18.4
14.7
11.3
10.7
8.2
4.3
5.5
3.7
*Base: Organizations that used external recruitment for - Middle Level

Page 44
Sample Characteristics
Back to Agenda
Demographics (1/3)
Region
Experience in HR Field
N=129
N*=112
%
Other
27.5%
4.4
More than 15
years
38.4
Bucharest
72.5%
8-15 years
4-7 years
40.6
Gender
1-3 years
N=129
Male
23.2%
Less than 1
year
14.6
2.0
Female
76.8%
*Base: Respondent who don't have the position of general management

G 1. What is the county in which your organization operates ? / G 9. Please tick your gender: / G 10. Approximately how many years of experience do you have in the HR
field?
Page 46
Demographics (2/3)
N=129
N=129
Form of Organization
Type of Company
Joint
capital
20.0%
100%
Romanian
capital
39.4%
100%
Foreign
capital
40.6%
%
Non-Governmental
Organization/ civil society
2.3 3.1
16.7
Public institution
21.6
Large Romanian company
Public/ Private Capital

Small and Medium Enterprise
%
N=120
5.1
53.0
90.2
4.7
Multinational organization
Entirely Public
Others
Entirely Private
3.2
Mix of capital(Public + Private)
G 3. Which of the following forms of organizations best defines your company ? / G 4. What percentage of the social capital of your organization is public and what
percentage is private ? / G 5. Which of the following statements best describes your organization?
Page 47
Demographics (3/3)
N=129
Field of Activity
Company Turnover
29.0
Professional services/ Media

Financial / Banking
IT
Auto industry
More than 5 000 000 Euro

3 000 000 5 000 000 Euro
11.8
1 000 000 - 2 999 000 Euro
8.3
6.5
500 000 999 000 Euro
7.7
14.4
100 000 499 000 Euro

Distribution / retail
Pharmacy / Medicine
6.1
4.7
Construction / Building Materials
4.1
Food/ Beverages industry
3.0
Telecom
Cosmetics industry / detergents / care products home
Other
44.6
7.1
50 000 99 000 Euro
14.2
Less than 50 000 Euro
3.8
9.5
Permanent Employees
2.3
Corporations
46.7%
0.7
SOHO
13.7%
22.3
SME
39.6%
G 6. Which field does your organization activate in ? / G 7. Approximately how many permanent employees does your organization have? Please tick in the appropriate
interval. / G 8. Please include your organizations turnover for last year in one of the following categories:
Page 48
Appendix
Consultancy for Human Resources Process

and Systems Development
! Small base for

Consultancy for HR
process to allow
detailed analysis !
Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
0%
100
80
Consultancy for HR Process within

More than 20%
76.8
63.2
71.5
60
32.1
40
21.9
20
1% - 20%
1.3
Q3/2010
(N*=70)

in Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
60.6
33.3
25.2
Q4/2010
(N*=62)
6.1
4.7
3.3
Q1/2011
(N*=37)
Q2/2011
(N*=62)
! Small base for

Consultancy for HR
process to allow
detailed analysis !

B 3, B 2, B 1, B 4
Page 50
62.9
33.9
3.2
Q3/2011
(N*=56)
Organizational Research Studies

! Small base for

Organizational
Research Studies to
allow detailed
analysis !
Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
0%
100
80
Organizational Research Studies

within the HR budget distribution
1% - 20%
More than 20%
80.7
70.9
66.0
74.8
69.9
60
40
26.7
20
34.0
30.1
23.1
19.3
2.3
2.1
0
Q3/2010
(N*=70)

in Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
Q4/2010
(N*=62)
Q1/2011
(N*=37)
! Small base for

Organizational
Research Studies to
allow detailed
analysis !

B 3, B 2, B 1, B 4
Page 51
Q2/2011
(N*=62)
Q3/2011
(N*=56)
Litigations/ Compensation
Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
! Small base for

Litigations/Compensation
to allow detailed analysis !
0%
100
1% - 20%
76.3
80
Litigations/ Compensation within

60
68.7
74.0
73.3
40
20
More than 20%
22.9
3.8
23.7
20.7
Q3/2010
(N*=70)
Q4/2010
(N*=62)
23.3
3.5
5.4

in Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011
73.1
Q1/2011
(N*=37)
Q2/2011
(N*=62)
! Small base for

Litigations/Compensation
to allow detailed analysis !

B 3, B 2, B 1, B 4
Page 52
25.9
5.3
Q3/2011
(N*=56)
Senior Level Recruitment (2/2)
2nd quarter/2011(N*=13!)
3rd quarter/2011 (N*=14!)
2nd quarter/2011(N=17!)
3rd quarter/2011 (N=15!)
Q2/2011
Q3/2011
N*=13!
N*=14!
Internship

%
Q2/2011
Q3/2011
N*=17!
N*=15!
Previous experience
13
12

Previous candidates

recommendation
Head hunting

recruiting sites
Job Fairs
13
Something else
Recruiting agencies
Employment office
Other method
COUNT
COUNT
*Base: Organizations that used external recruitment for Senior Level
Page 54
Thank You!

Raport HR Outlook 3rd Quarter 2011

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Raport HR Outlook 3rd Quarter 2011

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Romanian Human Resources Outlook

November 2011, Bucharest

Human Resources Strategy

Learning and Development

Recruitment and Selection

HR Department employees and General Managers

Data collection technique

Sample size : 129 respondents

2nd of December,2011 - 4th of January, 2012

Q3/ 2011 vs. Q3/ 2010

More companies with

Coaching and mentoring

Coaching and mentoring

Training on the job

Training on the job

More companies with

Higher usage of external

Higher orientation towards the development of Soft skills

Higher importance of price when choosing external

More companies use

Q3/ 2011 vs. Q2/ 2011

Lower budgets due to 2 possible causes:

Lower collaboration with

In house recruitment (use internal sources)

Part of the companies

Lower intensity (recruit, but fewer

Fewer Entry level positions

Human Resources Strategy

HR Activities Conducted in 2010-2011

Training and professional

Consultancy for Human

5001 20 000 Euro

More than 20 000 Euro

*Base: Organizations that performed HR activities during the respective quarter

Effectively Used HR Budget

More than the

Equal with the

Less than the estimated

*Base: Organizations that performed HR activities during the respective quarter

Training and professional development (training,

Consultancy for Human Resources process and

Specific HR logistics (certificate management, work

Organizational research studies

! Treat data with caution due to small base size!

Remuneration activities (here are included also the

Significant differences towards previous quarter (level of confidence 95%)

more than 20%

Significant differences towards corresponding quarter of last year

more than 20%

Cooperation with External Consultants in

Training and professional development

Consultancy for Human Resources process

Specific HR logistics (certificate

Organizational research studies

Other Activities category was not

Remuneration activities (here are included

cooperated with external consultants in a lower extent

! Treat data with caution

HR Budget Priorities in Q3/2011

Recruiting within the HR

IT Systems Usage for Recruiting

More than 20%

cooperated with external consultants in a lower extent