Hiring

[ChrisC]

Non-hunting related question...

It appears I am being put in a position at the company I work for to hire a new employee. I'm having resumes passed over to me and will likely be involved in the interview process as well. Not having any experience with this sort of thing, I find myself overanalyzing the resumes I'm getting. I was wondering if any of you have been put in this position and have any useful feedback about your experience: red flags, what not to get caught up with, etc. This isn't a high-level position but we've had bad luck in the past (I wasn't part of that but trying to figure out what was missed) and I'd like to get it as right as one can at this stage. Any feedback would be appreciated.

Thank you,
Chris

 

[dcopas78]

I've been involved in hiring several people over the years. One of the first things I look for in a resume is their job history. I like to see two thing.

The first is length at previous jobs. It doesn't have to be years, but I like to see that they have at least spent enough time in a job to give it a fair chance. I guess this has to do with the fact that they will need to be in the job for at least a year to attempt licensure in my field.

The second thing I like to see is small or no gaps between employment. Understandably, people can go a few months trying to find something, so you just have to use some judgment before deciding to interview them. This shows me that they at least want to work.

This usually gets rid of about half the resumes. Hope it helps.

 

[Nameless Range]

I've hired or been involved with hiring a handful of people in the job I currently occupy. I am no expert, but here are some thoughts.

-Take it seriously, get to know all of your applicants' history, materials etc. Not to add pressure, but you hold the future of someone's life in your decision making abilities, and you owe it to all of them and your company to do you due diligence.
- Resumes lend themselves to the truth, but do not tell it. I have been very hopeful regarding someone's resume, only to know within the first minute of an interview that they were not the right fit.
-Interviews are king. Make enough time for them. It should not be question, answer, next question. It should be a conversation to really get a feel for someone. I in fact like an icebreaker such as, "Tell me your favorite place in Montana and why."
-Pick whatever number of folks you plan to interview, we usually pick 3-5, and if none of them seem like a good fit dig deeper into the pool. Don't be afraid to repost a job.
-Don't know what line of work you are in, but where I work there is a probationary period lasting one year. Do not be afraid to utilize this period to let someone go if they just don't get it.

In my office, we will often have 40-60 applicants for a given job, so a lot of what I just wrote may not apply if you have significantly less.

 

[VikingsGuy]

I've been involved in hiring several people over the years. One of the first things I look for in a resume is their job history. I like to see two thing.

The first is length at previous jobs. It doesn't have to be years, but I like to see that they have at least spent enough time in a job to give it a fair chance. I guess this has to do with the fact that they will need to be in the job for at least a year to attempt licensure in my field.

The second thing I like to see is small or no gaps between employment. Understandably, people can go a few months trying to find something, so you just have to use some judgment before deciding to interview them. This shows me that they at least want to work.

This usually gets rid of about half the resumes. Hope it helps.

I have been hiring for 20+ years. I agree with dcopas78's thoughts. My first pass for a resume is to look for base requirements for the position and a pattern of employment that suggests the employee is going to be around for more than a year or two. I used to be fairly concerned about gaps, but given the disproportionate effect this view can have on women during child-raising years I have placed much less emphasis on that in the last 10 years.

My next lens is to see a progression of responsibilities and capabilities over their various roles. A colleague of mine always says, "there is a difference between 10 years of experience and 2 years of experience 5 times". He is spot on.

My last lens is the quality of the organizations they worked for, as it may suggest the quality of training and experience they will bring to the table.

Beyond that, most of my focus is on the interview.

A few other comments on inclusive hiring - men are more likely to stretch their experiences to fit the role, while women are more likely to undersell theirs. Be mindful of these differences when assessing resumes and interview answers. There is also position description lingo that can exacerbate this difference, but there are some quick and easy tools (like TextIO) that can scan your position description and catch the most common problems here - ask your HR team to run yours through the tool before posting.

 

[VikingsGuy]

if none of them seem like a good fit dig deeper into the pool. Don't be afraid to repost a job.

+1 Nothing kills performance like a bad or "I settled" hire.

 

[MThuntr]

I've been involved with reviewing resumes of recent graduates (never anyone with much or any experience).

1) professional involvement (industry specific) while not necessary is helpful
2) any amount of work ethic...again we hire almost exclusively unexperienced college grads so anything they can do to show they know how to work
3) not too much schooling...sounds dumb but someone that has spent decades in school likely won't make it in the "real world" and is better off in academia...we need those people too just not in my office
4) Non-traditional students...particularly GI bill and second chance adults (the people that hit the reset button on life and started over) make for some of the best recruits due to life experience
5) Agree with others...reject the group if nobody stands out. We had a guy we "settled" for and he lasted 4 weeks after we waited 4 months for him to finish school and then paid for a 2 week quarantine. His replacement starts next Monday nearly a 1 year after we settled.

EDIT: I cannot, repeat, cannot emphasize 5) DO NOT SETTLE! The replacement we got is an entitled, know-it-all that doesn't understand how experience trumps his "knowledge" because he read a single paper in grad school...I give him until October before he quits or gets fired.

 

[CB1]

Agree with what has been said above. Something I always paid attention to was grammar and spelling. Large quantities of errors are not always is sign of lack of being detail oriented but it’s a red flag. This is someone’s first impression and should take time to review these basic things. Obviously this depends on the type of role.

I am also of the mindset that I can teach you a skill (within reason) but I can’t teach you a personality or drive. In many roles I have hired for I looked for a desire to learn over just skill with no motivation. This has worked well for me historically.

 

[Wildabeest]

The only thing I would add is on the recruiting side. Work your network to find good people to target vs. just hoping the right person sees the job posting and applies. Get referrals from people you know and trust about others they might know who would be good candidates. Longer term, build a pipeline of potential people you would hire and maintain contact with them until you have an opening. 80% of my hires over the years were determined before I ever posted the job.

The way I approach the vetting process is that the resume is mostly used to weed people out. The interview is what determines whether someone gets an offer. I spend at least half of the time in the interview determining personality and assessing cultural fit for the broader team. I ask very open ended to questions to get them talking as much as possible. I put a lot of emphasis on team dynamics and morale, so I want to make sure any new person will contribute to that in a positive way vs. negative.

Two questions I ask every single candidate are:
1. Why are you looking to make a change? If they respond to that question by going on a rant about their current or previous job, company or boss, then they are immediately removed from consideration Life is what you make of it, and I don’t tolerate victim mentality.
2. What are you passionate about (and it doesn’t have to be job or career related)? I want people who are passionate. If they get to choose the topic, and don’t come across as passionate, then I likely won’t hire them. I can teach a lot of skills, but I can’t teach passion.

Once we have an offer accepted, I immediately send one of two books to each candidate as a welcome gift before they start. I either send them “No Excuses” by quadruple amputee Kyle Maynard or “Extreme Ownership” by former Navy Seal Jocko Willink. Both of those books espouse the attitude I expect of my team: Own the situation and own your outcome. No excuses.

 

[Hilljackoutlaw]

This is my least favorite thing to do at work and its even suckier now because of covid unemployment. I interviewed 11 people last month...not one of them really wanted a job.

 

[Fire_9]

Is it a job that involves hands on skills? If it is, i believe some sort of an aptitude test is key. If you say you’re great, show me. Expose them to the rest of the work group if at all possible. Spending 10 mins sipping coffee with the crew can expose a lot of red flags as well

I want to add that whoever you extend an offer to, be 100% honest with them on what they’re getting into. Wages, raise timeline, advancement opportunities, vacation, retirement, or anything else like that. There’s nothing worse than employer not giving someone the full story

 

[Fire_9]

The only thing I would add is on the recruiting side. Work your network to find good people to target vs. just hoping the right person sees the job posting and applies. Get referrals from people you know and trust about others they might know who would be good candidates. Longer term, build a pipeline of potential people you would hire and maintain contact with them until you have an opening. 80% of my hires over the years were determined before I ever posted the job.

The way I approach the vetting process is that the resume is mostly used to weed people out. The interview is what determines whether someone gets an offer. I spend at least half of the time in the interview determining personality and assessing cultural fit for the broader team. I ask very open ended to questions to get them talking as much as possible. I put a lot of emphasis on team dynamics and morale, so I want to make sure any new person will contribute to that in a positive way vs. negative.

Two questions I ask every single candidate are:
1. Why are you looking to make a change? If they respond to that question by going on a rant about their current or previous job, company or boss, then they are immediately removed from consideration Life is what you make of it, and I don’t tolerate victim mentality.
2. What are you passionate about (and it doesn’t have to be job or career related)? I want people who are passionate. If they get to choose the topic, and don’t come across as passionate, then I likely won’t hire them. I can teach a lot of skills, but I can’t teach passion.

Once we have an offer accepted, I immediately send one of two books to each candidate as a welcome gift before they start. I either send them “No Excuses” by quadruple amputee Kyle Maynard or “Extreme Ownership” by former Navy Seal Jocko Willink. Both of those books espouse the attitude I expect of my team: Own the situation and own your outcome. No excuses.

Add ‘crucial conversations’ and ‘radical candor’ to your book list.

 

[Wildabeest]

One other thing I will add is that there is no better way for you to improve your own skills at applying for jobs than to sit on the other side of that table. You’ll be amazed at how quickly you can detect BS by the candidates. We all think we are better at BS’ing than we really are. You’ll learn how transparent it really is, and hopefully learn not to do it when you’re in that situation. Nothing turns off an interviewer more than feeling like someone is bullshitting them.

 

[SAJ-99]

Hiring is super tough. Approach it with the view that ultimately it is always a roll of the dice, but don't settle. Agree with the others who have stated a preference for people willing to work hard and learn, especially in entry-level jobs. Just keep in mind that those who work hard and learn fast often want increased responsibility in a year. If they don't get it, they will be unhappy and you have a new set of problems.
The one piece of advice is be careful of "good fit". It is a common approach, but we tend to hire people we like and people like ourself. That is dangerous because the path that worked for you may not be the path that works for this job.

 

[Wildabeest]

Add ‘critical conversations’ and ‘radical candor’ to your book list.

I assume you mean Crucial Conversations? I’ve read that several times and we even offer a class based on that book. Definitely on my top 10 all time list. I have not read Radical Candor, but if you’re putting it in the same league, I will be downloading it today! Thanks!

 

[Deleted member 28227]

One other thing I will add is that there is no better way for you to improve your own skills at applying for jobs than to sit on the other side of that table. You’ll be amazed at how quickly you can detect BS by the candidates. We all think we are better at BS’ing than we really are. You’ll learn how transparent it really is, and hopefully learn not to do it when you’re in that situation. Nothing turns off an interviewer more than feeling like someone is bullshitting them.

I’d also say ask some real questions or even skills check.

As an applicant I hate when I’m interviewing for a position for a technical position and I interview with some C-suite person. You don’t know what I do, your going to pick the person that can spin the best line of BS.

Best interview I had, the manager, now a good friend pushed across a laptop and said, I need xyz, you have 10 minutes.

 

[rustednuts]

I value honesty among my team. Being in IT we all have made a technical mistake that broke something. So I always ask, what is your biggest technical mistake and then what steps were put in place to prevent that mistake in the future. We’re all human and have made mistakes. I’m looking for “perfect processes not perfect people.

 

[Wildabeest]

I’d also say ask some real questions or even skills check.

As an applicant I hate when I’m interviewing for a position for a technical position and I interview with some C-suite person. You don’t know what I do, your going to pick the person that can spin the best line of BS.

Best interview I had, the manager, now a good friend pushed across a laptop and said, I need xyz, you have 10 minutes.

Totally agree. We normally go through a process whereby candidates are interviewed by multiple people. I include non-manager peers to the role I’m hiring for in that process and their role is to assess technical skills and ability to do the job. Definitely critical, but IMO not the only thing to assess.

 

[VikingsGuy]

I assume you mean Crucial Conversations? I’ve read that several times and we even offer a class based on that book. Definitely on my top 10 all time list. I have not read Radical Candor, but if you’re putting it in the same league, I will be downloading it today! Thanks!

While not for the new employee, I still like "5 dysfunctions of a team" as a straightforward introduction to leading in matrixed organizations.

 

[VikingsGuy]

This is my least favorite thing to do at work and its even suckier now because of covid unemployment. I interviewed 11 people last month...not one of them really wanted a job.

Not reacting to hilljack personally, but more generally to the topic - Being able to attract, hire, on-board, train, grow and retain talent is what differentiates between successful leaders and mediocre middle managers. It is great ChrisC is reaching out for perspective - a good sign of future leaders is a "learner" mindset.

 

[rwc101]

Don't plow through a whole bunch of resumes at one time. Had 120 applicants for a job last year and I would mentally check out if I tried to tackle too many in a row. Create a list of required and desired skills and weight them according to importance. Rate every candidate on the same scale so you can tally up the scores and compare. Scores aren't everything, but should help prioritize who to give interviews.