I am taking this opportunity to offer a response of your post. Through my readings, I came across text that stated that the recruitment is not the only variable that influences the applicants’ attraction. Rynes and Barber (1989) noted that there are other distinct strategies that increase the success of attracting labor. The first ‘other’ factor I would like to address is the one you talked about, recruiter. As the organizational representatives, recruiters or the hiring managers do affect the applicants’ impressions as well as the decisions about the entity. It, therefore, remains important that the recruiters have the right characteristics through selection or training.
Recruiters affect the recruitment function through their effects on the enhanced public relations aspect of the attraction. They also have the capacity to exert pressure on the job applicants, thereby enhancing the attraction rates. In addition, as you put it, the recruiter will be the company’s voice in communicating all the packages that the employer has to offer. Therefore, a well-informed recruiter is likely to increase the attraction rates while one who cannot effectively disseminate the excellent benefits an entity gives may lower the attraction rates.
The second ‘other’ factor that I found in the course of my research is the employment inducements. The individual elements addressed under this ‘other’ factor include the incentives that an employer promises the applicants and may be improved benefits, provision of child or eldercare, higher salaries, implementation of flextime, development of internal career paths, and improvement of the working conditions (Rynes & Barber, 1989). Related to these inducements are the retirement benefits you addressed in your post. The impact of such benefits on the recruitment function is that an entity that offers them increases the applicants’ attraction.