The studies reviewed in the previous section point to the existence of several
contextual and contingency factors aVecting both the practice and eVectiveness of
recruitment. Some of these contingencies have already been highlighted above,Wrst
and foremost sectoral or industry moderators. The following section expands on
this review and adds other studies that have a descriptive focus, examining how the
practice of recruitment may be inXuenced by several contextual variables. Al-
though other contextual variables (such as institutional norms) may be important
(Rynes and Cable 2003 ), organizational attributes and strategies tend to be the
variables that have been investigated the most, as shown in Table 14. 2.
The most clearly articulated description of the impact of organizational context
on recruitment strategy is in Windolf ’s ( 1986 ) seminal article. Windolf proposed
Wve distinct recruitment strategies, which can be placed in a parsimonious two-
by-two matrix of contingency variables, as depicted in Fig. 14. 2. The two variables,
classiWed as either high or low, are theWrm’s labor market power and theWrm’s
‘organizational intelligence,’ which is deWned as the ‘capacity of theWrm to use
professional knowledge, to collect and process information, and to work out
complex labour market strategies’ (Windolf 1986 : 239 ). In this model, theinnova-
tiverecruitment strategy is concerned with attracting a heterogeneous group of
creative applicants, drawing on a wide range of recruitment sources. A second
recruitment strategy occupying the same high-high quadrant is theautonomous
strategy, which starts with a precise deWnition of the ideal candidate in terms of
skills, age, or sex. Therefore, autonomous Wrms, isolated from labor market
(a) innovative/
(c) status quo (b) autonomous(e) muddling
through (d) flexible'Organizational
intelligence'low highLabor
market
power
highlowFig. 14.2. Windolf’s typology of recruitment strategies
Source:Windolf 1986.
recruitment strategy 283