January 14, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Comments posted to this topic are about the item Clearing the Bar
January 15, 2008 at 5:26 am
It's not just the time pressure, it's often terribly hard to spot a great candidiate when they are right in front of you. They many not interview well, you may not interview well, might just be asking the wrong questions. The more specific the job requirements the harder it is to find someone that qualifies as great!
January 15, 2008 at 6:35 am
It is actually a pretty good strategy. Time lost searching is non productive, and there is often not enough of a payoff for someone far better than what is required. Additionally they are more likely to be lured away by an even better offer.
You're right. It is a lot like dating. Negotiating mate selection is an old biological problem, with a lot of fine tuning prewired into our brains. Passing up suitable mates looking for a better one loses valueable reproductive time, trying to keep a mate that is 'out of one's league' can be resource expensive and ultimately futile. Take a good (honest) look at how people choose who to approach, and when. Without accepting the explanations we make for ourselves, look how the behaviors subconsiously approach this critical problem.
...
-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --
January 15, 2008 at 7:00 am
It's most noticeable in the contract market, where unless you're available yesterday, you won't get an interview.
This to me seems to encourage hiring the worst candidates, as they're most likely to be available!
Not so much of a problem now but a few years ago there was such a dearth of candidates that it was often the case that you had to get someone, and anyone marginally better than an empty seat got hired...
January 15, 2008 at 7:05 am
This strategy is necessary in a lot of areas. Buying a used car (a better deal might never show up) or buying a house (you generally have time, location and cost constraints... passing up a suitable one may pay off very badly)
...
-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --
January 15, 2008 at 7:21 am
A few thoughts:
- If you can't fill the position for long periods of time, or you seem to only get marginally qualified people, perhaps it's time to either change the position or change the posting. It's very hard to tell with most positions posted these days what kind of position it really is, with a lot of the verbiage being highly generic (high on lawyer-speak, and low on any real substance). Ahem - It might also mean you're asking for too much for givng too little...
- I think the strategy is a good one, as long as you don't fall into the trap of always looking for the ephemeral "ideal candidate" (you know - the one with 200 years of experience, personable, articulate, and works 200 hours per week for free). The luck of the draw dictates that some times the very first candidate you meet IS the right one, and if he's right for you - he's probably right for someone else. I'd recommend having the open req. expire every once in a while, so that you make sure you review and decide if anyone you saw during that time IS the right person, or someone noteworthy.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
January 15, 2008 at 8:32 am
I think it's more complicated.
I don't want to hire the best candidate if it's obvious that they'll only be with me until they'll find something better - I don't have time to go through the whole recruitment process 12 months down the line, having invested a lot of my time in training this candidate.
And I don't want to recruit someone who's going to push me out of my job somewhere down the line....
Unfortunately my HR department make it very hard for me to not employ the 'best' candidate.
January 15, 2008 at 8:45 am
What's "best", is a hard question. And it varies by manager and company.
To me, the best is someone that fits with the team, gets along, works hard independently but within the team, and is willing to stay for a few years. I'd love to have people that want to be there 20 years, but I think that's unrealistic.
The world changes and all I ask is that you tell me you want to leave, or you want to move on. I understand that and am more than willing to help you move along and find a new job. And I need to find a replacement, so I want to be able to "manage" the process. I'm even happy to argue that I want to keep two people in the same slot for a short period (training time, turnover, etc.) to make sure you still have income as you're moving on.
January 15, 2008 at 8:51 am
Steve Pitt (1/15/2008)
I don't want to hire the best candidate if it's obvious that they'll only be with me until they'll find something better - I don't have time to go through the whole recruitment process 12 months down the line, having invested a lot of my time in training this candidate.And I don't want to recruit someone who's going to push me out of my job somewhere down the line....
Unfortunately my HR department make it very hard for me to not employ the 'best' candidate.
I wish I knew how you can predict what someone will do in 12 months from now. I can't guarantee what I'm doing for lunch, let alone know where I will be in 12 months.
As for not hiring the best candidate (for any reason) - that's just plain sad. The "right" employee might actually make you look good, and not step over you. That paranoid attitude will end up catching up with you at some point - it's not healthy. Playing for the team makes the TEAM and each of its players better; playing for yourself benefits noone, and often facilitates you not being ON the team.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
January 15, 2008 at 9:02 am
In my recruitment process, I have to have 7 or 8 standard questions (approved by my Human Resources department beforehand to ensure that all of my questions comply with relevant employment law) that all candidates are asked, and one practical test.
I have to determine beforehand what marks are awarded to each reply, based on the candidate's responses e.g. "Did not understand the concept of normalisation - 0 points", "Understood the concept of normalisation, but couldn't identify the 3 main normal forms - 3 points", "Fully understood and showed evidence of frequent use of normalisation to 3rd normal form and beyond - 7 points".
Each of the candidates can subsequently ask for clarification and details of their scores....
So that's how I have to determine 'best'.
January 15, 2008 at 9:14 am
I admit that I may be a little bitter, just having been through a traumatic recruitment process.
I agree about the future - I don't know what I'm doing for lunch, either. I do know, however, that if I have a candidate that's just been made redundant by a large consultancy, and is now applying for my job which pays £25,000 less a year than they were earning, then the chances are that they won't be with me for long unless there's something wrong.
January 15, 2008 at 10:38 am
There are mathematical analyses for how far you have to go through a fixed-size pool of applications to be "reasonably" sure you have a "good enough" qualified person, where the probability of finding someone better is small enough that it outweighs the additional effort to interview the others.
From memory, I believe I recall that the optimal number is greater than half and probably somewhere around two-thirds.
January 15, 2008 at 10:58 am
There are two intertwined issues.
1) Hiring the best candidate
2) Building and maintaining effective teams
As a manager I assume the all of the employees will be average. I build a system that allows my average employees to excel at getting the work done. The best employees are in charge of the system. You can replace system with methodology, architecture, work flow, data design, etc.
As the system evolves based on the insight of the best employees the team becomes more successful. This often raises "average". When one of my best employees leaves, their knowledge remains in the system, so the loss is minimal. As the system changes the qualities that define “best” changes. This allows an average employee to step up, which sometimes does happen.
January 15, 2008 at 12:07 pm
Network.
Recruiting begins by networking with those in the field. Then you can find qualified candidates as they really are and not under the pressures of an interview which is really a sales job being done by both parties. Full time job, yes.
Who wouldn't hire Steve if a position opened up in the firm? Would you really make him interview? No, more likely you would make him an offer, twist his arm and do what ever to entice him to join.
This doesn't work for all business and all levels but certainly for key positions.
January 15, 2008 at 12:18 pm
John LeBrun (1/15/2008)
There are two intertwined issues.1) Hiring the best candidate
2) Building and maintaining effective teams
I guess it's a matter of definition, and may well be where Steve Pitt was coming from. I guess I'm thinking the two are one: you can't be "the best candidate" if you're going to work against the team/sabotage/hijack or whatever other term like that you want to pile on.
If the best technical person is going to spend their time backstabbing their team members or their manager (or unfortunately if that impression comes across during the interview), then they're going to graduate to the circular filing system faster than just about anyone else. A prima donna that disrupts the team is worse than not having anyone in that position, in my humble-but-often-strongly-worded opinion.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on my part...unless you're my manager...or a director and above...or a really loud-spoken end-user..All right - what was my emergency again?
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 19 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply