How to suck at finding employees (contractor, companies, money, wage)

[joey2000]

1 - Be rigid in your "must have" job requirements. Do you want the best person for this job or not? Well guess what, even the best might not fill all the squares. And how long can you sit - ie how much time/money/etc is the company losing - while that position remains unfilled and HR and staffers sit there because the "perfect person" hasn't arrived yet? Sure, you don't want to grab just anyone, but if you've had it open awhile and gone through a ton of resumes, it's time to look at who the best is and roll with it.

Probably the most common and so worst of the lot is the almighty college degree. Hey I have mine, big believer and all, but unless you're willing to hire people with minimal experience, guess what: any degrees for anyone with a fair number of years experience probably has little if anything to do w/that person's ability to do the job.

But the one that really gets me are when someone expects a person to know their obscure, proprietary systems or processes well, if at all Do you know how much you just narrowed the field and how many highly qualified people that could quickly learn it and are probably best of the job you just tossed out the window?

2 - Discard a highly qualified (perhaps even the most qualified) candidate because they had - gasp - even the tiniest of typos or their resume/cover letter/application, or it was otherwise anything less than 100% perfect (eg an extra space between 2 words or slightly diff font in one small spot, etc). Unless you are hiring a proofreader or secretary or some such, and esp if you are hiring for a job in which writing skills are not esp important, this is more than a little idiotic. Yeah, I know...they SHOULD be perfect, and I'm not saying ignore a horrifically sloppy resume, but come on - your job is to get the best person for the job, not the best proofreader. Even professional journalists screw up from time to time, and they ARE supposed to be letter perfect.

3 - This one is mostly for headhunters/staffers/etc. Insist someone come in to meet you even though you don't have any job prospects for them. Better yet, when they come in, bore them to tears with the background or history about your company, which trust me NONE of them could possibly give a rat's behind about. I understand the value of a face-to-face, but doing it just for giggles is stupid. Have a job you're willing to submit them for, assuming the meeting goes well. In other words: don't waste their time.

4 - Discard someone because they fumbled here and there during the interview. Obviously if you're hiring a salesmen or something similar that requires strong "presentation skills," that's different, but again: is the slickest guy what matters, or do you want the most qualified guy?

I realize it's a "seller's market," ie employers can afford to be picker these days, but these kind of things blow me away.

[Wandering_Spirit]

I totally agree with everything you have written. Well said and rep points for you.

[gardener34]

Oh yeah, subject the interviewers to "psychological" interviews with questions specifically designed to trip them up in order to prove that they are really deep down closet embezzlers or something...

Decide that someone is not right for the position 3 minutes into the interview.

[killer2021]

Why anyone would even bother to hire an employee is beyond me. Too much red tape. My company only has one employee thats me. Everyone else is just an independent contractor or someone I hired from India or Asia to do some grunt work. Makes things ALOT easier. Oh yea and if you are wondering why unemployment is so high look no further than the myriad of employment law. Sexual harassment, minimum wage, fair labor standards act, employment discrimination blah blah blah the list goes on and on. When a potential employer sees all these laws, this is what they think: Risk of getting sued.

Oh yea and if you wanna know where the labor market is going, have a look at this site: odesk.com

[cocytus]

Originally Posted by joey2000

1 - Be rigid in your "must have" job requirements. Do you want the best person for this job or not? Well guess what, even the best might not fill all the squares. And how long can you sit - ie how much time/money/etc is the company losing - while that position remains unfilled and HR and staffers sit there because the "perfect person" hasn't arrived yet? Sure, you don't want to grab just anyone, but if you've had it open awhile and gone through a ton of resumes, it's time to look at who the best is and roll with it.

Probably the most common and so worst of the lot is the almighty college degree. Hey I have mine, big believer and all, but unless you're willing to hire people with minimal experience, guess what: any degrees for anyone with a fair number of years experience probably has little if anything to do w/that person's ability to do the job.

But the one that really gets me are when someone expects a person to know their obscure, proprietary systems or processes well, if at all Do you know how much you just narrowed the field and how many highly qualified people that could quickly learn it and are probably best of the job you just tossed out the window?

2 - Discard a highly qualified (perhaps even the most qualified) candidate because they had - gasp - even the tiniest of typos or their resume/cover letter/application, or it was otherwise anything less than 100% perfect (eg an extra space between 2 words or slightly diff font in one small spot, etc). Unless you are hiring a proofreader or secretary or some such, and esp if you are hiring for a job in which writing skills are not esp important, this is more than a little idiotic. Yeah, I know...they SHOULD be perfect, and I'm not saying ignore a horrifically sloppy resume, but come on - your job is to get the best person for the job, not the best proofreader. Even professional journalists screw up from time to time, and they ARE supposed to be letter perfect.

3 - This one is mostly for headhunters/staffers/etc. Insist someone come in to meet you even though you don't have any job prospects for them. Better yet, when they come in, bore them to tears with the background or history about your company, which trust me NONE of them could possibly give a rat's behind about. I understand the value of a face-to-face, but doing it just for giggles is stupid. Have a job you're willing to submit them for, assuming the meeting goes well. In other words: don't waste their time.

4 - Discard someone because they fumbled here and there during the interview. Obviously if you're hiring a salesmen or something similar that requires strong "presentation skills," that's different, but again: is the slickest guy what matters, or do you want the most qualified guy?

I realize it's a "seller's market," ie employers can afford to be picker these days, but these kind of things blow me away.

Having some bad interview experiences I take it?

Like most things in life getting a job takes time and effort.
If you have to eat "poop" until you get what you are looking for..then that's the price of the ride.

Most places that ask a lot from their potential hires rarely get it and have settle for what's out there.
When I see a lot ridiculous requirements for a position,I usually figure that they have a terrible HR Dept. or that they are trying replace somebody that was being overworked w/ somebody looking to be overworked.

[joey2000]

Originally Posted by cocytus

Having some bad interview experiences I take it?

No, actually #3 is the only one I have personally experienced.

Like most things in life getting a job takes time and effort. If you have to eat "poop" until you get what you are looking for..then that's the price of the ride.

You seem to have me confused with a teenager. I wish.

When I see a lot ridiculous requirements for a position,I usually figure that they have a terrible HR Dept. or that they are trying replace somebody that was being overworked w/ somebody looking to be overworked.

Me too. But again they hold most of the cards, unfortunately. I just wonder how many companies out there are suffering because of incompetent HR Depts and/or staffers they hired.

[harry chickpea]

Good observations, but I've been on both sides.

Those calls for an interview with "no" job available are often fishing expeditions for great talent (or at worst an excuse for a company paid lunch at a good restaurant). If everything clicks, a job will be MADE for the person. The company line being spewed is to judge reactions and see how much (read WHO) the person knows, and if the fit is right. Custom made jobs are rare, but they do occur. Othertimes, that custom job may just be a placeholder while someone within the company who is underperforming or upsetting the boss is eased out.

Errors on resumes. There is absolutely no excuse for an error on a resume. None. Zero. Zip. Nada.
A resume is the absolute best presentation a person can muster. The work a person does, and the accuracy of that work, is indicated by that resume. Errors on applications? Sure, no big deal. Those are often rushed and there is no time for the person to review them. However, MAJOR errors on an application often can mean the person doesn't care about/can't/won't/is incapable of following basic instructions. Points off if the person is allowed to take an application home and mail it in, and STILL makes bad errors.

If you are over 35, college degrees simply mean you have the patience to put up with idiotic systems for a few years and smile broadly enough when being fed crap that you were able to get a good behavior certificate. Employers like that. A college degree that is ten or more years old means diddly when a job is a specific one requiring specific talents developed outside of college. It means as much if you root for the bosses football team.

Arcane knowledge. A job requiring arcane knowledge is often a legacy job that will be phased out when the next generation of arcane knowledge makes it completely obsolete. A few of those jobs in engineering might have a future, but most are exactly what you DON'T want as a job if you want to stay out of the job market for a few years.

[Jaggy001]

By the time candidates reach me for interview, they have already been screened by HR so I know they have a certain base level of qualification. So, in the interview, what I am looking for is personality and whether that personality will be a good fit with the business and our other employees. I barely glance at their resumes which, in any event, all look the same and do nothing to differentiate the candidate.

[joey2000]

Originally Posted by harry chickpea

Those calls for an interview with "no" job available are often fishing expeditions for great talent (or at worst an excuse for a company paid lunch at a good restaurant). If everything clicks, a job will be MADE for the person. The company line being spewed is to judge reactions and see how much (read WHO) the person knows, and if the fit is right. Custom made jobs are rare, but they do occur. Othertimes, that custom job may just be a placeholder while someone within the company who is underperforming or upsetting the boss is eased out.

Yeah, but those are very rare exceptions (company lunch? Where is this cuz I'm applying!); I'm talking generally.

Errors on resumes. There is absolutely no excuse for an error on a resume. None. Zero. Zip. Nada.

Actually there are several. For one, people are human and so make mistakes. In fact, these days the "trend" is to tailor resumes to specifics jobs, which means a LOT of tweaking back and forth. Given all that, it would be very easy to make a mistake. Again, unless you're hiring for a job where proof reading skills are exceedingly important, to dismiss a highly qualified candidate due to this is ridiculous.

A resume is the absolute best presentation a person can muster.

Even if true (and often it's not), again that only matters if you're hiring a presentation giver or resume writer.

The work a person does, and the accuracy of that work, is indicated by that resume.

No, it's not. It's not even close. It's ONE example and it may show little to nothing of what that person is capable of job-wise. In fact, when I went through a layoff, one of the sharpest guys I knew was caught up in it and he asked me to check his resume as he just wasn't adept at that kind of thing. I caught a couple of grammatical errors which weren't in my opinion "severe," but I could just see some HR goofball pitching his resume because of it and missing out on one hell of a good employee.

Errors on applications? Sure, no big deal. Those are often rushed and there is no time for the person to review them.

Now you've really lost me. One tiny error on a resume is unforgivable, but multiple errors on an application are "no big deal?" And since when are applications rushed? I've filled out my share (unfortunately - don't get me started down that path ), and was never rushed.

However, MAJOR errors on an application often can mean the person doesn't care about/can't/won't/is incapable of following basic instructions.

That I agree with, and really is to a large extent my point: it's a question of degree.

A college degree that is ten or more years old means diddly when a job is a specific one requiring specific talents developed outside of college. It means as much if you root for the bosses football team.

So you would think. But you'd be amazed how many jobs, even for highly experienced people, insist on that piece of paper.

Arcane knowledge. A job requiring arcane knowledge is often a legacy job that will be phased out when the next generation of arcane knowledge makes it completely obsolete.

Speaking for IT only, it's really arcane systems that come to mind, and my experience/impression that such systems are usually extremely tenacious in sticking around....

[maschuette]

It is hard to find good help. Even if people go through the entire dog and pony show and managed to get hired they could still end up being worthless. So if they cant even be thorough enough to get through a ten minute interview than GOOD BYE.