Posts filed under 'candidate'
Take a look at HBS’s Working Knowledge,Hiring for Executive Intelligence. Some quotes that rocked my world:
IQ test questions don’t assess the practical, on-your-feet thinking skills needed in business. What’s more, these tests have been repeatedly accused of racial and gender bias. Yet, despite these very real shortcomings, IQ tests are still a better predictor of managerial success than any other assessment tool. [HUH??? --JR]Because each question in the behavioral interview essentially assesses the same qualities, there’s no need for the grueling three-to-four-hour sessions favored by hiring managers today. They need only ask enough questions to get a reliable appraisal of the candidate’s work experience, job knowledge, and social skills. [Excuse me, but that's not been my experience --JR]Despite their advantages, behavioral interviews really only establish a candidate’s minimum qualifications; they don’t identify star talent. [Of course behavior-descriptions are not enough by themselves. --JR]
The article goes on to say …tests should focus on the particular cognitive subjects associated with executive work: accomplishing tasks, working with and through others, and judging oneself.
Ok, so now the good folks who publish in HBR agree that auditions are key to evaluating a executive’s potential for a position. The example they use is actually a good example.
Auditions for senior management are harder to develop than auditions for technical staff and first- and mid-level managers, but they are certainly not impossible. Any audition that requires the exec to disclose the questions he/she has about the circumstances and leading to a decision and the ability to make a decision is useful. Executive auditions do look more like case studies and need to be evaluated that way.
December 6th, 2005
Warning: I’m on a rant. Yesterday’s Wall St. Journal had an article called “Behind ‘Shortage’ of Engineers: Employers Grow More Choosy” (if I could figure out the URL, I would paste it in here, but I can’t figure out how to do that. Sharon Begley is the author, and the WSJ requires registration. If you’re not a subscriber, it costs money.)
Sure enough, Begley describes multiple cases of hiring-manager shortsightedness:
- Eliminating people without BSCS degrees (even though they had work experience in similar companies!)
- Some were overqualified
- Some weren’t familiar with a specific piece of software
Maybe it’s my head cold, but this seems completely nuts to me. They did all this reduce the number of phone screens from 200 resumes? Phooey on them.
Here’s one reason why, quoting from the article Companies often draw up extremely narrow job descriptions, recruiters and staffing managers say, causing searches to get drawn out. I supposed if you don’t analyze the job and write a real job description, you have to write a narrow job description and use filtering software to eliminate the multitude of candidates.
I don’t see why you can’t write a good job description, and if you want, put a test-like thing in place to screen candidates before you even review their resumes. Ah, but that would require real strategic and tactical help from the HR folks, which may not be possible in many organizations.When hiring becomes strategic, then people will invest some time in setting up a hiring process that works rather than one that dehumanizes candidates and increases the cost to the company.
November 17th, 2005
Sometimes, I work with managers who can’t tell the differences between technical people. They seem to think all developers (or testers or project managers or whomever) are equivalent. If you’ve ever tried to make the case for hiring the best people, read Joel Spolsky’s Hitting the High Notes.
Spolsky says
… duplication of software is free. That means that the cost of programmers is spread out over all the copies of the software you sell. With software, you can improve quality without adding to the incremental cost of each unit sold.Essentially, design adds value faster than it adds cost.
Note that Joel says later in the article,
The quality of the work and the amount of time spent are simply uncorrelated.
Some people work faster than others. But the really great people will have great ideas and work at (overall) similar paces. And, what’s more important, the quality of their work is head-and-shoulders above the rest.So think hard before you let your standards down and hire the next-best, or the third-best. It will cost you time and money.
July 26th, 2005
I received a pointer to Write and Get Hired today. And like most busy people, I didn’t read the blurb. Maybe the article will work for you, but I don’t find verbalizing my goals to be helpful. I do find writing them down helpful.
But you can write and get hired. Write an article for a print or on-line magazine. Write a letter to the editor. Start (and maintain) a blog.The more you articulate your position and your strengths, the more people will realize your potential in their organization. Your writing will help you network, which will help you find a job.
If the goal things work for you, go for it. But don’t neglect writing other people can see. The more you write so other people can read your writing, the more likely you are to be hired.
July 6th, 2005
Last week, while driving to/from parents and funerals (my folks are fine), I had several long talks with my sister, who’s looking for a job. She’s the best salesperson I’ve ever met. She’s great at selling, and stays friendly with her clients over the years. She stopped selling in high tech about 16 years ago (sold Tupperware for a long time), and is now looking again for a job selling in high tech.
She’s having a little trouble moving past the gatekeepers. “You don’t have a Business degree.” True, she has a degree in a particular type of business. “You don’t have recent experience selling products just like ours.” Well, of course not. If she’d been working for a competitor, she would have trouble with a non-compete agreement. “You have too much/too little experience.” Can’t win with that one.
My sister’s run into what I’ve called the laundry list job description, although I’m wondering if a better description is a recipe. She’s good at selling, so she’ll determine a way to move past the gatekeepers :-), but I have to wonder about these hiring managers who have such rigid requirements that only people with precisely those requirements will fit.
It is important to be clear on what your requirements are for a given role, and what you can compromise on and what you can’t. But degrees are not something to be rigid about. And depending on the environment, neither is exact product domain expertise. (You need to expect to teach domain expertise to new hires.)People rarely have linear career growth. Instead, they take opportunities as they arise. It’s more important to see that people learn from their opportunities (and deliver what they are supposed to deliver) than it is to see that they meet some number of years of experience.
So think of what you really want to see in a candidate’s experience — what you want and what you need. And remember that candidates are unique individuals. You might have thought about the job one way, but a great candidate might be stellar in another way. Leave the recipes for baking. You’re looking to hire people. You don’t have to compromise on the candidate, but you may well have to compromise on the candidate’s background. Instead of a recipe, look for experience producing or delivering. Then you’ll know you have a good candidate.
June 21st, 2005
Louise Fletcher in What’s Your Email Address? says “Choose an address that is as bland and professional as possible.”
Well, I don’t know that I would categorize a professional email address as bland, but then, I’m a geek. But I absolutely agree with Louise about the suitability of the email address she referred to “sexyeyes…” You might be “wannabeaskibum.” Right, that will impress potential hiring managers and HR people. (Actually, if you wanna be an anything that’s not this job, why are you applying for this job??) Even an address such as “lovesdogs” isn’t sufficiently professional enough.
Hiring managers, if you see a candidate with an email address that’s not professional, it is information. But you have to be a little careful about what information it is. It does mean that the candidate didn’t take the time to acquire a professional email address. It could be that the candidate was so bowled over by your position that he or she didn’t want to waste even the five minutes it takes to obtain a free email address. Or, it could be that the candidate didn’t even think about the effect the candidate’s email name would have on you. Or, it could mean that the candidate wants to work with other people who have similar interests. You just don’t know.
Candidates, why take the chance? If you’ve gone to the trouble of creating a bang-up resume and this job looks great, why not use a professional email address? By professional, I mean an email address that doesn’t look like a hobby or a come-on (or anything else I wouldn’t even think of 
Remember, your email address is part of the first impression people have of you. Make it a good one.
April 22nd, 2005
In a previous comment, a reader points to a resume that’s written like a cross between a cover letter and a resume. While the resume has a number of useful points, the resume is too quick to tell possible hiring managers what they are doing wrong. That dismissal of what hiring managers sometimes do also dismisses a possible partnership between the hiring manager and the candidate.
A partnership? That seems like an odd comment or expectation. Here’s why: Part of what candidates seek is a cultural fit with the hiring company — in particular, the hiring manager. What the hiring manager looks for is someone who can perform the work the hiring manager perceives is needed, and who can fit into the existing organization.I have to admit, I hadn’t thought about this notion of a partnership before, but when a position really fits the candidate (and vice versa), it does create a partnership. I’ll be thinking about this more… But in the meantime, whether you’re a candidate or a hiring manager, it’s worth your time to think that each person is doing the best job he or she knows how to do, and that each person’s goal is to treat each other with respect.
March 19th, 2005
Mike has a fine (and funny) piece on what to do (and a little about what not to do) as a candidate, Applying for a Java job - HOWTO. His major points:
- Your cover letter or email should be in readable English
- Your experience should be relevant
- Read the bloody job ad (his words, not mine)
- Do something, anything to stand out
- So you have experience, explain it!
- Lose the insanity
Candidates, employers do want to hire you. But they want to hire people who are (at least) close to being suitable for the job. Match your technical skills to open positions. Remember, you could be a hiring manager someday.
January 31st, 2005
I will admit it. I am no fashionista. I know what to wear for everyday work, for speaking, for weddings, and for funerals. I’m not so hot at everything else. But I have two daughters who sound just like my mother, “You’re wearing that??” if I make a mistake.
If you’re a man, Anthony has some lovely suggestions in Casual Fridays. (I asked him in a comment if he had suggestions for women, and sheesh, you’d think I’d asked him the “do my hips look fat in this” question. Every man who’s ever been involved in a relationship longer than 2 minutes knows there is no answer for that question. Not if you want to keep the relationship.)
Hiring managers — read Anthony’s advice. You don’t have to be dressed up. Do remember the candidate is here to see you. At least make sure your jeans and t-shirt don’t have holes.Candidates — it’s ok if you’re slightly more formal than the people you’re interviewing. That shows you’re interested in the job and are treating this whole experience with respect. People will look at what you’re wearing and make snap judgements about you. Make sure it’s a positive one.
Oh, if you’re a bloglet reader, you’ve missed several postings. Bloglet was confused.
January 27th, 2005
Next Posts