Slowly but surely, permanent and flex data are moving toward each other. This is not without controversy, because in many cases they are oranges and tangerines. They look alike, taste somewhat the same but are really different. A minnow is a hybrid and when it comes to the data, talent intelligence and dashboarding of fixed and flex we are really moving toward that hybrid now. It goes beyond two different data points in one dashboard. Meanwhile, they are in the same figure and therefore comparable. Although there are still nuances to be made in this comparison and it is not yet interchangeable, this is already a giant step. From total talent management theory to a practical model.
We are now laying before you the 10th Talent Monitor. It has so far been a journey into the worlds of permanent and flex in the labor market and unraveling secrets within them. From a few open doors, in which flex is almost always less tight (but still very tight) than the market for permanent jobs and that the duration of an assignment is shorter than the duration of an average employment contract (also this gap is getting smaller). But also to surprising insights such as:
In this Talent Monitor we continue to unravel and surprise with new insights. We take the unique step of comparing the rates for permanent and flexible personnel, per target group. Which hired professionals are much more expensive than their permanent colleagues? And which ones are not? An important development towards a fully-fledged data model for Total Talent Management.
Curious about all outcomes? Download the Talent Monitor here.
Every quarter Intelligence Group and HeadFirst Group provide unique insights on labor market related themes based on Intelligence Group's recruitment and labor market data, combined with HeadFirst Group's hiring data. Both data sources are stored in a structured way, in accordance with the ISCO standard.