Frustrations in hiring/recruiting

Forums › Off topic › Frustrations in hiring/recruiting

1 | 2 | 3

2394 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2287
Inactive user

#1086806 10-Jul-2014 22:46

aperfectcircle: I firmly believe that the best person to do the hiring is the manager of the role in question - they know what they're after skills-wise, and can also assess the often more important "team fit".

To be fair to the HR/recruitment types, there's a risk of workplaces being turned into little fiefdoms of the managers concerned when hiring is left entirely to them. As of today, I've been prompted to a 2nd line manager role and my manager thought it was a good idea for me to go and have a chat with recruitment/HR about some of our concerns and certain things will change, which is good. I was then asked to help shortlist for a role that I know a bit about and one which again interacts frequently with my team.

It was an eye-opener, in the sense that this is the first time that I really saw the process from beginning to the end and I've drawn a few conclusions.

Recruitment, like everybody else, has their inadequacies. However, their job isn't easy and shortlisting is made triply hard by the sheer number of applications. The role concerned paid near 6-figures minimum and is a pretty serious, professional role which require a good skillsets that needn't be deadly specific but is not something that everyone has. Yet it had 100+ applications and to be brutally blunt, 70% of the applicants were totally wasting their own time and ours.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE people don't be one of the above time-wasters. I've been reliably informed by our recruitment that they operate informal "plonker filters" for people who constantly apply for almost every single advertised role in order to save their time. I can understand why after seeing the sheer volume of unsuitable applicants. Much as I can occasionally be dissatisfied with our recruitment, they simply won't let any of these plonkers through. In this regard, they are doing their jobs.

When people waste their own and our time like this, you're making it more likely that other proper candidates get missed when someone has read their 67th CV and is developing a big headache. I know -- this happened to me today. Fortunately, I went back and realised I made a mistake and added this one good candidate to the interview list. How would you feel if you were one of the victims?

My little exercise of doing this process from beginning to the end (admittedly I did read the applications in more depth than HR would) for someone else's role - although I am quite familiar with the hiring manager and the person reported their satisfaction with my efforts - took nearly 3 hours.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2287
Inactive user

#1086829 10-Jul-2014 23:13

I was also amazed by the failure of so many supposedly professional-level applicants to appreciate the basics of writing a decent CV. Now I know there are 20 million theories of what makes for a good CV and I am not talking about basic stylistic preferences. What grinds my gears are facile, meaningless statements like "Established track record in [stuff related to the role]". What does that mean? Either tell me something you've achieved that's relevant to a core competency or a relevant skill or some sort. Otherwise, just don't bother.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2287
Inactive user

#1093031 21-Jul-2014 14:14

On another front, I was pretty appalled to learn that a sizable portion of my work's hiring managers routinely take over 2 weeks to get back to all interviewed candidates (via HR) about whether or not they've succeeded. My mind just boggles -- we aren't talking about completing the hiring process, just whether someone has made it to either a second interview or an offering subject to all the relevant checks. I just can't understand why so many managers seem to be oblivious to the need to project a professional image during the hiring process.

BruceHamilton

77 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 18

#1093056 21-Jul-2014 14:42

If you happen to find a good HR person, value them, as they can make employing someone a good, simple experience.

The HR person will ask you to draft the position description and KPIs before even accepting an advertisement form, they will run the final advertisement by you, they will collect and collate all responses, give them to you to review and separate candidates in No, Maybe, Interview within 3 days, get back to unsuccessful applicants immediately, arrange interviews, and sit in on the interviews, then quickly complete all paperwork for both successful and unsuccessful applicants.

Having worked with such paragon, I know they exist, but are rare, possibly endangered. Our HR person knew they had to harrass the technical managers to quickly review applications and make decisions - otherwise applicants could be left wondering for days or weeks. If your HR doesn't do all of the above, put some pressure on them, moving up the management if necessary, as such tasks should be in the HR job descriptions and KPIs.

HR sitting in on the Interview was mandatory, as twice the unfortunate situation arose where technical managers interviewing alone made discriminatory comments that unsuccessful candidates subsequently took to court, and obtained out-of-court settlements.

BlueShift

1692 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 969

#1093124 21-Jul-2014 15:48

And you lot doing the advertising - make it easy to avoid wasting your time and mine: put an expected salary range on that advert! If I see you've advertised a job that sounds similar to mine at $10-20K more than I'm getting, its worth a crack. If its advertised at $50K more than I'm on, then it might not be for me. If its being advertised at the same or less than I'm on now, odds are we won't be meeting. Having to guess at what 'suitable remuneration' you have in mind for your generic job ad (or even worse, edgy, trendy job ad) is frustrating to us all, especially if your recruiters refuse to give a figure until after you've been interviewed and you find out that the whole thing was a waste of time to get offered a job at $15K less than you already get.

Bee

741 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 189

#1093142 21-Jul-2014 16:00

BlueShift: And you lot doing the advertising - make it easy to avoid wasting your time and mine: put an expected salary range on that advert! If I see you've advertised a job that sounds similar to mine at $10-20K more than I'm getting, its worth a crack. If its advertised at $50K more than I'm on, then it might not be for me. If its being advertised at the same or less than I'm on now, odds are we won't be meeting. Having to guess at what 'suitable remuneration' you have in mind for your generic job ad (or even worse, edgy, trendy job ad) is frustrating to us all, especially if your recruiters refuse to give a figure until after you've been interviewed and you find out that the whole thing was a waste of time to get offered a job at $15K less than you already get.

To add to this are the ads that are just way too vague. I've applied for several and heard back nothing because they were obviously looking for something that I don't have but when the ad says something like "Must be nice and friendly" or "must have 3 years experience" and they are offering $200k, then I know I'm not going to get the job even thou I have the 3 years experience and everyone says I'm friendly... What are they not telling me and why not???

Doing your best is much more important than being the best.

Lego

Shop now for Lego sets and other gifts (affiliate link).

BruceHamilton

77 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 18

#1093143 21-Jul-2014 16:00

Sorry, but in my industry putting a salary/TRP in an advert is just telling competitors you're full of eggs just waiting to be poached.
We determine salary to match the applicant, but the HP person will advise any potential applicants that contact our HR whether the applicant's salary aspirations are within the position's budget. Generally, for me, applicants asking about the salary is a fast track to the No pile.

BlueShift

1692 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 969

#1093146 21-Jul-2014 16:04

BruceHamilton: Sorry, but in my industry putting a salary/TRP in an advert is just telling competitors you're full of eggs just waiting to be poached.
We determine salary to match the applicant, but the HP person will advise any potential applicants that contact our HR whether the applicant's salary aspirations are within the position's budget. Generally, for me, applicants asking about the salary is a fast track to the No pile.

Works for me, any company that willing to waste my time is not one I wish to work with.

deadlyllama

1283 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 476

Trusted

#1093155 21-Jul-2014 16:28

BruceHamilton: Sorry, but in my industry putting a salary/TRP in an advert is just telling competitors you're full of eggs just waiting to be poached.
We determine salary to match the applicant, but the HP person will advise any potential applicants that contact our HR whether the applicant's salary aspirations are within the position's budget. Generally, for me, applicants asking about the salary is a fast track to the No pile.

I once went for a job (not advertised) at a friend's workplace. It sounded really good until I found out they wanted to pay me much less than my then-current job. We could have wasted much less time if they'd told me in advance they wanted lamb for the price of mutton.

mattwnz

20520 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4797

#1093193 21-Jul-2014 18:09

BruceHamilton: Sorry, but in my industry putting a salary/TRP in an advert is just telling competitors you're full of eggs just waiting to be poached.
We determine salary to match the applicant, but the HP person will advise any potential applicants that contact our HR whether the applicant's salary aspirations are within the position's budget. Generally, for me, applicants asking about the salary is a fast track to the No pile.

What I have done in the past is ask for a salary guide / bracket of what the pay will be, eg maximum and minimum. In fact no company has ever refused to provide this. This prevents me wasting my time applying for something where the pay is poor, and also saves the company wasting their time if I am out of their price range. If a company doesn't have the courtesy to provide that, then it wouldn't be one I would be willing to work for. There is no reason for them not to disclose that information on request, and if they refused it would indicate to me that they are hiding it for some reason. I can understand though why it isn't put in ads for competition reasons, but it should be provided on request. People do work for money after all, and have cost and debts to pay.

matisyahu

1640 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 355

Trusted

#1093385 22-Jul-2014 02:58

aperfectcircle: I firmly believe that the best person to do the hiring is the manager of the role in question - they know what they're after skills-wise, and can also assess the often more important "team fit".

In-house recruiters only really work for bulk recruitment - high volume/low skills roles (contact centres, retail), where it's more about running a process.

Recruitment agencies can be good - where they're specialists in a particular area, so they know the industry/function, and have an established network/database of good quality candidates.

We axed our entire in-house recruitment function about a year ago and put hiring back to managers. They couldn't be happier. The biggest problem with companies (usually the big ones) that run in-house recruitment is that the really good recruiters simply won't go work in-house. They're essentially sales people, and the good ones know they can earn the money working for agencies on a commission structure, so companies end up with the "average" ones who are happy to work a 9 to 5 on a fat salary without the need to put in the hard yards.

Disclaimer: I work in HR (obviously not recruitment!)

Even so I work in fast-food (or as head office likes to call it - 'quick service restaurant') - HR just read the CV's, check for any red alerts such as referees, references, criminal check (basically the leg work we can't be bothered doing at the store) and then we make the decision at the store level whether to hire and from there whether to develop the person further into an hourly manager then a salary manger (with the blessing of the area manager). Many times you find that HR seem too over analyse things and make assumptions about the lack of something or the presence of something must obviously mean something bad when in reality it's absence or presence is pretty benign. Lack of experience can be good because you're training them as a clean slate rather than trying to undo a life time of really bad habits and as long as the person is able to pick things up quickly then it might work out better in the long run.

"When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called 'the People's Stick'"

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2287
Inactive user

#1093743 22-Jul-2014 14:33

As a hiring manager, I have absolutely no qualms about naming (on request), a minimum of the lowest salary we will pay for the job and a round-about estimate of whether a candidate's expected salary range is acceptable to me/us as an organisation. Whilst we are cost conscious, I am very keen to ensure that we behave like decent employers - I won't low-ball someone just because they seem naïve about how much they are worth. Essentially, we pay above market salary without ever being interested in paying absolutely top, top dollar (so you're talking about top 10 - 15% of the salary range instead of the top 1%). You want top, top dollar in financial compliance? Go work for Goldman Sachs and the hardcore IBs and enjoy your 80 hour weeks plus possibly working for people that have been responsible for ruining lives and economies.

However, I expect candidates who ask about salary (especially prior to interview) to be prepared to engage in a two way process with me to learn a bit about the job and let me or the HR person learn about them. If you sound like spending 5 minutes to tell me about your background on the phone is beneath you, then I am not interested. To be frank, people who read the PD properly and then ask to speak further with our HR (who will typically on-forward suitable enquiries to me) and engage in a professional way will have a big edge in getting an interview.

Also please take our specific requests seriously: I've forgotten the number of times I've told people NOT to come wearing a full suit and tie for interviews and have people turn up in exactly that. I'm doing this for you and for me: I want you to be relaxed in a decent dress shirt and pants (for guys, by way of example) and engage with me in a more human fashion and not like a robot. This isn't Bell Gully, Russell McVeagh, EY, PWC or any other one of those stuffy professional services firms: your suit doesn't impress me, even if it is worth $2000.

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2287
Inactive user

#1093745 22-Jul-2014 15:02

Overall, I really wish people would just model more professional behaviour overall during the hiring process. And this goes both ways for the employers (and their representatives) along with candidates. One anecdote: I've only ever decided not to hire one person after making an initial offer subject to referee and other checks. This guy had a brilliant career and academic history and frankly looked like The One to replace me in a previous role. But almost from the beginning, every little thing he did put us off. A very senior HR person rang him late afternoon/early evening and left a voicemail advising that we'd like to offer him an interview and asked him to call us back. By 3pm the following day we hadn't heard a peep from him, so the HR person and I dialled his number and he answered and advised that he was about to call us back.

OH RLY? Are we this uninteresting to you that you couldn't even make a couple of minutes in the morning to make some contact? And he sounded absolutely bored and disinterested throughout the phone call. When it came to the interview, his answers were fantastic and clearly he knew his stuff, so we let the previous incidents slide. Then the HR person asked him to forward details of referees and copies of academic transcripts etc after we confirmed that he was the preferred candidate. It took him 3 full days to do this and there was no communication in between.

His referees all spoke of someone who was totally brilliant but relatively uninterested in going out on a limb for anyone or anything. To put it another way, self-centredness was the name of his game. We ran a mile.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 10018

#1093800 22-Jul-2014 17:02

Best tip for recruitment is from David Brent,
"Avoid employing unlucky people by throwing away 50% of the job applications without even reading them."

SepticSceptic

2263 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 779

Trusted

#1097243 28-Jul-2014 17:10

One day I may be a job applicant, next day I could be one your biggest customers. DO the courteous thing and reply back whether I am successful or not, and in a timely manner.

Word gets around if you disrespect job applicants.

1 | 2 | 3