Friday, October 24, 2014

Hiring 2.1 - on-going rant

Just some last thoughts, then I am going to stop. Promise.

In my previous post, I highlighted that the main problem I have with the Hiring process is that it is too slow. Its almost designed to make sure that the company will frustrate candidates, and that the candidate that eventually made it through to the end of the process simply had no other alternatives.

The other issues are:
  • candidates only get to see the financials right at the end. You go through the whole process only to find out they cannot afford you.
  • working for a company is not a marriage. I've read too many posts that when people resign, the assumption is that they have somehow broken "the trust". Nonsense - working is purely a business agreement, with benefit to both sides. The company gets its work done, and the candidate gets a salary. If I were a millionaire, I would not be working.
I could not have said it better than Quora:
In most cases the mistake is the interview itself. In all its clever variations, the interview is a terrible way to determine if a candidate could be of value to a business.
I think it filters out good talent more than it finds. Human nature is to game the interviewee. Even very novel selection strategies by Fortune 500 companies are vigorously scrutinized by candidates in an effort to cheat them.
Take for example the infamous Stryker Gallup test and interview process. Check out this forum: gallup test - Stryker Jobs
Post a Comment