How (not) to recruit

Common sense when looking for talent

In the last few weeks I’ve briefly explored the market as a candidate with disappointing results on the experience (and it is not even the first time).

So a rant follows, but with a focus on the lessons that companies can learn.

What do you want?

This is probably the more important bit. I think you need to be pretty honest. Usually when we recruit there is a feeling of recruiting really “smart people”, because “that’s what Google does”.

As an aside, Google fails to hire some really smart people (and they know it). And they also do much more than ask smart questions.

But many companies think smart trivia is the way to go, and the usual “algorithm for being able to reverse a linked list” or similar stuff, usually with time constraints have a place in any selection processes.

Companies ask those questions, so people looking for a job prepare those questions.

But do you want people looking for a job that are preparing interviews to cheat the rigged game? Or do you want people that might change their job if the right opportunity comes, even if they don’t know the text book definition?

I’m not kidding. This was some feedback a few years back. So yes, I’m biassed

This is something I’ve always tried to stress when I’ve been part of a team doing recruiting. I feel a candidate has to show some software engineering competency. And maybe you can gauge the level of their actual experience with some questions. But for me the key element was always how the candidate works with others. I’m not even talking about pair programming. Do they listen? Can they react to other people ideas in a good way? Would I be happy working with them?

Instead, it is not uncommon to recruit complete assholes that are smart enough to know (or study) the answers. And believe me, I don’t have a lot of experience in recruiting, but I can name a couple of former colleagues I (and others former colleagues) wouldn’t like to work with them again.

Process

It seems obvious. You need to have a process in place. Ideally describe it to the candidate from the get go. But at least have it in your mind.

Obvious one. If you tell the candidate “this is the final interview”, and after it you tell the candidate “I have asked HR to move forward with you as a candidate for the position”, HR cannot come back and then schedule another interview. Even worse if HR presents this “post-final interview” as “yeah, this guy wants to chat with you” and then the candidate discovers it is an actual interview.

Three weeks after this they were still working on the details. And, yes the conversation was an interview

I think it is important to define the process up-front. Obviously, the process can be cut short (screening gone badly). But knowing how it goes, everybody sets their expectations accordingly.

Cristal clear

Another obvious one, but in my experience it is not.

If you are having an interview on the phone or through VoIP, your voice needs to be perfect.

I know the “you’re cutting out” is part of the bingo card in today’s WFH world. But when working, you already have context. Interview processes are high stress situations with little context.

The candidate might already be struggling to answer your question, but if your voice is cutting out, you give him/her no chance. Moreover if the candidate has English as a second language (yes, I’m biassed). But even if not.

One recent interview, they said “Sorry, no video. My WiFi is not work well”. It turns out audio wasn’t working either and there was some interference every couple of seconds.

On another interview, the call dropped twice in less than 10 minutes.

A third one, with a panel, one of the members with bad quality. Garbled question from him. My usual answer “I understand you’re asking me about <best guess>, and I think that <best answer>”. It turns out it wasn’t only me. Other member of the panel said then “Thanks Gonzalo. <Name> you’re cutting out” so in that case it worked for me pretty well. But in a one to one, I would have been f-word-ed.

I’m not making this up. These are real experiences.

Communicate, communicate, communicate

Some companies believe recruiting is going to the market and “buying candidates.

I’m the buyer, I don’t have obligations.

If that was the case at some point in the past, that is certainly no longer the case. You can probably recruit with a buyer perspective people that are actively looking if you have a great name, and/or a big budget. But the market is shallow nonetheless.

So you might have more success if you try to seduce instead. And like in real life, the key is to communicate. A lot.

That doesn’t mean jumping into a phone call for everything. Calls take time.

It means:

1. Every time you want to schedule something you say: a) Phone only vs audio/video b) What is this meeting for c) What should the candidate expect in terms of format and d) How long will it last.
2. After the candidate has provided availability, then you schedule, and you send the names of the people that will be part of it.
3. After each interview, either later that day, or if not the following day, you give feedback to the candidate. You don’t need more than one day, and if more than one day has passed, the feedback isn’t worth a dime. Of course, you can look for feedback from the candidate, as well (and it feels good). But give feedback.
4. If you say you’re going to do something by some date, and come the date you haven’t done it, you send an email immediately, apologise with a brief explanation. If you cannot give an answer at that moment, set a date and really really really commit to that date
5. If neither 3, nor 4 happen, and your candidate contacts you (remember: because you haven’t done your frigging work), you send an email immediately, apologise, again, brief explanation. If you cannot give an answer at that moment, set a date and really really really commit to that date.
6. If your candidate contacts you because you had promised they would already have an answer from you (i.e. you had promised something and you hadn’t respected that) and they tell you he or she has another offer and they are waiting for you…do not ghost them. It is probably the worst thing you can do. Failing to answer because you know it is urgent but you cannot give a proper answer is terrible.

Don’t be stingy

You’ve reached the offer stage. Obviously, tech people tend to negotiate really badly. You may know the minimum salary that the candidate would accept (not the desired, or expected, the minimum).

Obviously, the minimum might be your maximum. And that’s fine.

But in general, do not offer him that minimum.

You are still trying to seduce him/her.

And by sending a stingy offer, you are not selling the role. They might buy it, because they don’t have another option. Or they might not, because your process was shit and your offer stingy.

But in the best case it is not good start.

Conclusion

There are people looking for a job. For multiple reasons.

There are other people that have a job, but that wouldn’t mind exploring other options. But being a candidate is a pain.

If you want to recruit those candidates that are not in the market, seduce them.