Job Hacking

re: Another ding against The Ladders

Cynical Girl posts up some good reasons to avoid The Ladders for both job hunters and folks looking to hire. 

I'll give you another possibility, call it a hypothesis: ROI of using a given job posting service. My guess is that for entry- to mid-level roles, Craigslist comes out on top. So, why use a high-price job board that doesn't give you value?

What's not appealing to women?

One of the best performing Sr. SDE job ads I have ever written had a headline which was a quote from the movie "Office Space".

All the Developers who responded were men. Hmm.

When you write a job ad, it's good to begin with the end in mind, and then write the headline first (not the job title).

Scarcity, 2007

Scarcity is a very important attribute in marketing a product.

Candidates and Hiring Managers do not seem to understand this very often, which is too bad.

By way of example, we visited a fine Southern Oregon Winery, Schmidt Family Vineyards(Ever heard of them?). We tried their 2007 Cabernet Sauvignon, and wow, it's good! I'm planning on putting my purchase in the cellar and let it age for several years.

Then, we meandered down to the closest eatery, The Buckboard Grill (Ever heard of this place - only 2 reviews on Urban Spoon, could be that it's not urban enough). Had a really nice French Dip done with Tri-tip. And, you could buy the aforementioned Cabernet for $6 a glass - and it was a healthy pour to boot - for $6!

The thing about both these products is that you gotta go there to get them - they only service the local market. There are only 225 cases of the Cabernet being produced. And my guess is that this particular wine is going to skyrocket in price as a result of the few cases being produced and the quality of the product. Yes, it's really that good.

What does all this have to do with job hunting, or attracting talent who meets/exceeds the bar? Stay tuned...

Job Ads Redux

Job ads, can't live with them, can't live without them...

Most job ads seem to be written to bore the reader to death. Or, to scare the applicant away from applying. It's too bad because they are an amazing place to start making your company a better place.

The challenge is in finding a job ad that really nails it, to use as an example.

Try this one: Looking for a LAMP God. When you read this, what comes through to you? Why wouldn't you want the person this attracts (after you sift through the no-fits)?

Caveats: I do not know who wrote this, I do not know the firm PhotoRocket, nor do I knowingly know anyone who works for this firm. And, since this is posted on Craigslist, it's going to be going away soon, so look at it NOW!

re: Good Enough

Kris Dunn has a very intriguing post for all you hiring manager & company execs out there, The Concept of "Good Enough" and Your Talent Strategy: Who's the Customer?

If you've ever waffled regarding a hiring choice between several candidates because of your perceptions of how long you think they'll stick in a job (no, I'm not talking about you, but you have a friend...), then go read this now!

Interviews as entertainment

I am fascinated with interview questions, everything about them. 

What type of questions do you use to break the ice? Establish rapport? Understand what the candidate did in their prior work? Help establish capabilities? Figure out boundaries? Understand how the candidate will fit with your team? Your customers? Which questions don't work? Which ones make you look like a jackass?

Backing up a bit...

Top 25 odd (and tough) job interview questions of the year

There are a few in here that are worthy, #22 for example. But how does someone describing how to move Mount Fuji help you know to hire them (unless you are in the excavation business)? 

Really, truly, that's your answer? 

If you use this type of question, I want to know why they help you assess a candidate in a meaningful way for a job. You know, in a 60 minutes or less kind of way. Aren't there better? 

Something like, "Here's a project we are thinking about, write up how you'd approach a solution, and identify the risks in your solution, as well as the costs and expected outcomes." 

To help fuel the debate here are a few posts to challenge your interview question assumptions (the firs four are from Seth, and the last one is a debate that Punk Rock HR brought back at the end of last year:

• The end of the job interview
• Two ways to hire (and a wrong way)
• I'd be a lousy pilot
• What are you hiring for?
• Keep your salary history private. Maybe.

Here's the important bit in all this: What evidence do you have to tell you that your interview questions help you make the best decision about any given candidate? 

re: What Does New HR Look Like

Laurie's got an interesting post today. She wants to now how you would create an HR function for a company, given a blank sheet of paper.

I've got a few ideas about this, like signing up the Execs to recruiting and retention goals, but that's just me.

What I wonder is this: Let's say you are an outta work job seeker. And, let's say you had the opportunity to design this HR function, and for good measure, let's also say it includes Recruiting. What would you do differently? Would you make the Recruiting function respond to all applicants because it builds your Employment Brand? Or maybe you would make the recruiters follow-up with all candidates, regardless of outcome, upon pain of firing? Or maybe you think Recruiting as a separate function is silly, and you'd push it back onto the Hiring Manager?

re: Open Letter to HR Departments: What’s the Deal?

Matt Youngquist has a thought-provoking post about the current state of recruiting, especially that of candidate follow-up.

If any of you out there have comments about this issue from the Employer or HR standpoint, I'm certain that Matt and his readers would love to hear from you!

Bear-Proof Containers and the Recruiting Process

This last week, I ran into a fairly interesting product: A bear-proof container that wasn't. I was helping our Boy Scout Troop get ready for a long weekend hike in the Olympics, and this was one of the requirements.

The situation reminds me a lot of recruiting.

Why is it that the people directly involved in the hiring process remind me of the elation Yellow-Yellow must feel when opening up that bear-proof container? Why is Yellow-Yellow the only one who figured it out? How long until Yellow-Yellow won't be able to open them anymore?

Sigh.

Do you know your ABCs?

Auren Hoffman's post on Why Hiring is Paradoxically Harder in a Downturn was clearly of high interest in the recruiting world. 

And, yeah, he's right, there's a very high signal to noise ratio when you go looking for talent in this market.

But that whole A-Player thing? Not so much.

All bosses think they are A-Players. But, if you think about the whole A-Player framework, it's a fallacy, because once you move up a level, you automatically get assessed by a new set of criteria. And, this is where the A-Player framework breaks down for me. I've experienced too many BAD BOSSES who think they are A-Players when it comes to building a team. And guess what they say after they've hired someone who doesn't work out? 

"Oh, they just didn't meet expectations, they aren't an A-Player"

Um, yeah, right. Did you look in the mirror before you said that?