| Course | GB546 Talent Acquisition and Retention |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 5 |
| Paper type | Sourcing channel analysis |
| Length | About 910 words, 6 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | MBA |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for GB546 Unit 5
Most Applicants, Fewest Keepers: A Unit 5 Sourcing Channel Analysis for Equipment Technicians
[Student Name]
Purdue University Global
GB546: Talent Acquisition and Retention
Unit 5 Sourcing Channel Analysis
[Instructor Name]
[Date]
The plant, its channels and every count and cost are composite and illustrative; the sources cited are real.
Method
Measure. Each channel is judged by cost per hire still employed at twelve months. For equipment technicians, the costliest departures come after the twelve-week tool qualification, so a ninety-day window would miss most of them.
Costs. Direct cost covers fees, advertising, bonuses and event costs paid to obtain candidates. Recruiter time is added at a loaded $48 an hour, because screening hundreds of weak applicants consumes hours even when the posting itself is cheap.
Period. All technician requisitions opened in the past eighteen months, with each hire tracked to the twelve-month mark or the analysis date.
Channel Table
Each row gives applicants, hires, yield, average days to fill, direct cost, recruiter hours, hires retained at twelve months and cost per retained hire.
Job boards: 612 applicants; 9 hires; 1.5 percent; 41 days; $21,408, about $35 an applicant; 194 hours, $9,312; 5 retained; $6,144.
Employee referrals: 58 applicants; 8 hires; 13.8 percent; 34 days; $12,000 in $1,500 bonuses; 40 hours, $1,920; 7 retained; $1,989.
Community college certificate program: 51 applicants; 6 hires; 11.8 percent; 63 days; $4,000 in program sponsorship and career fairs; 60 hours, $2,880; 5 retained; $1,376.
Military transition program: 40 applicants; 5 hires; 12.5 percent; 88 days; $1,780 in event costs; 70 hours, $3,360; 5 retained; $1,028.
Staffing agency: 37 candidates submitted; 7 hires; 18.9 percent; 18 days; $105,165 in fees, about 20 percent of first-year base; 12 hours, $576; 3 retained; $35,247.
Rehires of former technicians: 7 applicants; 3 hires; 42.9 percent; 22 days; no direct cost; 12 hours, $576; 3 retained; $192.
Totals: 805 applicants, 38 hires, 28 retained at twelve months.
The channel that sends the most applicants produced the fewest technicians who stayed, and its true cost only appears once recruiter hours and departures are counted.
Reading the Ranking
Ranked by cost per retained hire, rehires come first at $192, followed by the military transition program at $1,028, the community college program at $1,376, referrals at $1,989, job boards at $6,144 and the staffing agency at $35,247. The order nearly reverses the applicant counts.
Job boards are cheap per applicant but expensive per keeper. Recruiters spent 194 hours screening 612 applicants to find 9 hires, and four of the nine left within a year.
Referrals convert well and retain well, which matches research showing that referred hires tend to stay longer, possibly because current employees give candidates an accurate picture of the job (Zottoli & Wanous, 2000).
The staffing agency is fastest, at 18 days, and by far the costliest. Its fee is paid whether or not the technician stays, and four of seven did not.
The military transition program is slowest, at 88 days, because separation dates are set months in advance, but every hire stayed. Its slowness is a scheduling problem, not a quality problem: candidates can be recruited before separation and start on a planned date.
How Much to Trust the Small Channels
Five military hires and three rehires are too few for firm conclusions; a single departure would change either channel's retention rate sharply. The analysis treats both as promising rather than proven and recommends tracking them for another year before shifting large amounts of budget toward them. Breaugh (2008) notes that recruitment source differences are often smaller than they first appear once applicant characteristics are controlled, which is another reason for caution.
What the Channels Mean for the Forecast
The Unit 2 forecast calls for about 42 technician hires in eighteen months, more than the 38 the plant made through all channels in the past eighteen. The cheapest channels are also the smallest: rehires, referrals and the military program together produced 16 hires. Scaling them will not happen on its own. Referrals depend on current technicians knowing candidates, veterans arrive on separation schedules, and the pool of former technicians is fixed. The plant will therefore keep needing higher-volume channels for part of its hiring, and the analysis is a guide to mix rather than a case for dropping any single channel. Cascio et al. (2019) recommend judging recruiting spending by the quality and tenure of the hires it buys, not by the number of applicants, and the mix below follows that principle. If the plant moved half of its agency hires to referrals and the military program, at their current cost per hire, the yearly saving would come to about $30,000 in fees and recruiter time before counting the better retention those channels have shown.
Recommendations
Use the agency only when a tool would otherwise sit idle. At $35,247 per retained technician, it is justified only when vacancy cost exceeds the fee.
Raise the referral bonus and pay half at twelve months. A $2,000 bonus, $1,000 at hire and $1,000 at twelve months, would still cost far less per retained hire than job boards.
Recruit veterans before separation. Start contact six months before separation dates so the 88-day lag stops mattering.
Contact former technicians each year. Rehires are the cheapest channel; a simple annual note to technicians who left in good standing costs almost nothing.
Keep job boards for reach, but screen faster. A short technical knockout question would cut recruiter hours on weak applicants.
References
Breaugh, J. A. (2008). Employee recruitment: Current knowledge and important areas for future research. Human Resource Management Review, 18(3), 103-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrmr.2008.07.003
Cascio, W. F., Boudreau, J. W., & Fink, A. A. (2019). Investing in people: Financial impact of human resource initiatives (3rd ed.). Society for Human Resource Management.
Zottoli, M. A., & Wanous, J. P. (2000). Recruitment source research: Current status and future directions. Human Resource Management Review, 10(4), 353-382. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-4822(00)00032-2
GB546 Unit 5 instructions, in plain terms
In GB546 Unit 5 you analyze the sourcing channels an organization uses for one role. Define the outcome measure, such as hires retained at a set point, and explain why that window fits the role. Count direct costs and recruiter time for each channel. Build a channel table with applicants, hires, yield, days to fill, direct cost, recruiter hours, hires retained and cost per retained hire. Rank the channels and explain what drives each result. Say how much small channels can be trusted. Connect the findings to the organization's hiring forecast. Recommend changes in channel mix. Expect about five pages built on the table, citing recruitment source research in APA 7 and labeling any estimates.
Inside the GB546 Unit 5 example
The method chooses twelve-month retention because technicians are costliest to lose after qualification, and costs recruiter time at $48 an hour. The table runs from job boards, 612 applicants at about $35 each and 194 recruiter hours, to rehires at $192 per retained hire. The highlighted sentence explains why the largest channel keeps the fewest. Zottoli and Wanous support the referral result, and the military program's 88 days is treated as a scheduling problem the plant can plan around. Small cells are called promising rather than proven, with Breaugh's caution. A forecast section uses Cascio and colleagues to favor quality over volume, and five recommendations change the mix.
Reading the GB546 Unit 5 grading rubric
Instructors grading a GB546 channel analysis look for a cost-per-retained-hire ranking that includes recruiter time. Choosing a retention window that fits the role earns points because it shows the measure was considered. Counting recruiter hours shows high-volume channels at their true cost. A complete channel table shows thoroughness. Explaining what drives each channel's result shows analysis. Treating small cells cautiously shows statistical judgment. Connecting channel capacity to the hiring forecast shows strategic thinking. Recommendations that change the mix without abandoning needed volume show balance. Zottoli and Wanous on recruitment sources, Breaugh on recruitment, and Cascio and colleagues on HR investment are cited in APA 7.
GB546 Unit 5 help: mistakes that cost points
Many GB546 Unit 5 analyses rank channels by applicant volume or cost per applicant, which favors the channels that keep the fewest hires. Others leave out recruiter time, which makes cheap postings look far cheaper than they are. A frequent gap is retention: a channel that fills seats fast can still be the most expensive if its hires leave. Some writers draw firm conclusions from three or four hires. Define the outcome and window, count all costs, build the full table, rank by cost per retained hire, explain each result, flag small cells, connect to the forecast and recommend a new mix. Estimating and labeling missing recruiter hours is better than omitting them.
Get a GB546 Unit 5 example written to your instructions
What shapes the analysis is channel data: applicants, hires, time and cost by source, whether issued with the Unit 5 exercise or pulled from requisitions you have anonymized. Add the rubric. It returns within 24-48h with every channel costed per retained hire, speed treated separately and small numbers handled honestly. A first sample costs nothing. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More GB546 papers and MBA samples
- GB546 Unit 1: Discussion Board Post
- GB546 Unit 2: Workforce Demand Forecast
- GB546 Unit 3: Labor Market Scan
- GB546 Unit 4: Employer Value Proposition Brief
- GB546 Unit 6: Seminar Reflection
- GB546 Unit 7: Recruiting Funnel Analysis
- GB546 Unit 8: Turnover Cost Model
- GB546 Unit 9: Retention Plan
- GB546 Unit 10: Staffing Business Case
- GB545 Unit 5: Benefit Plan Comparison
- GB542 Unit 5: Development Program Design
- GB541 Unit 5: Case Analysis
GB546 Unit 5 questions, answered
Why use twelve-month retention rather than ninety days?
For technicians, the costliest departures happen after qualification, which takes about three months, so a ninety-day window misses them. Twelve months captures the loss that matters. For high-volume roles with faster ramp-up, ninety days can be the better measure. The example states its choice and the reason; your analysis should match the window to the role it studies.
Are five or six hires from one channel enough to draw conclusions?
Not firm ones, and the example says so. Small counts can swing on a single departure, so the analysis treats the military transition and rehire results as promising rather than proven and recommends tracking them for another year. If your data has small cells, report them honestly and avoid ranking channels on differences a single hire could reverse.
Should recruiter time be included in cost per hire?
Yes. Leaving it out makes high-volume channels look cheaper than they are, because screening hundreds of weak applicants consumes recruiter hours even when the posting itself costs little. The example costs recruiter time at a loaded hourly rate. If your case lacks hours, estimate them and label the estimate, since omitting them distorts the ranking.
Where can I find a free GB546 Unit 5 sample paper?
This page carries a full GB546 Unit 5 sourcing channel analysis ranking six recruiting channels for technicians by cost per retained hire, with a channel table, recommendations and APA 7 references.
Why is the staffing agency so expensive?
Its fees, about 20 percent of first-year base, are paid whether or not the technician stays, and four of its seven hires left within a year, leaving $35,247 per technician retained.