Here are a few things I’ve seen that can slow down a hiring process: 1. Needing candidates to make a comparison to. In an ideal world, you’d have 3 candidates that you could choose from, but you don’t need this to make a good decision. If you find a candidate that can do the job and adds to your culture, hire them. Don’t lose them over this. 2. Trying to find the “perfect” candidate. You have your perceived requirements of what a perfect candidate is. Years of experience, the right companies on the resume, the education, etc… It’s unlikely you will find a candidate that matches all the requirements, so if you find someone that is an 80% match, pull the trigger. 3. An undefined process and too many decision-makers. You’d be surprised how often there is no formal process for hiring decisions. Before you start the process, make sure you are clear on the number of steps and who is making the decision. There’s nothing worse than asking the candidate to come in for one more panel interview. Follow The Realest Recruiter - Recruiting Is No Joke Podcast for more recruiter content and humor.
A cry emoji is missing.
It's not the big that eat the small, it's the fast that eat the slow. Better not be slow in making decisions, you will be left on the outside looking in!
+1 We're finding that protracted decision making isn't intentional (unlike ghosting which is a whole other issue). Often times it comes down to three things: 1. We need more skills based calibration between recruiter and HM at intake with some "author assist" on key skills 2. We need better scoring on those skills 3. We need better notetaking (AI notetakers are a 'thing' right now) With those three nuggets it can be easier to #hirekind Take a look at www.hireguide.com for more Hireguide
All of these ring true - Our job is to make sure managers don't fall into these tropes. Sometimes managers will listen - others times, unfortunately, they need to fall on their face and learn the hard way.
"We loved them! They're perfect!..... Can you find us like 5 more that look exactly like them? Literally, use their resume as a guide please."
Rather, the alternative, you just don’t hear back at all 🤷🏾♂️
So you want leave hrs without job?)) Why company will need them if everyone hired already?)) Make as hard as possible. So for 4 months there are no candidates. Then - you hired one and management thinks hr made such a great job))
here at #TAhumorcards we strive to find a card for every situation. Joel Lalgee feel free to use this as needed.
Yeah most likely they take a whole week to reply!
Pharmaceutical Industry Scientist - MS&T - Regulatory Affairs - Technology Transfer - Validation - LSSBB - Project Manager
2wMy two cents: 1- You do not necessarily need to compare candidates with each other, since you already have a pool of employees on your team to compare them with. A qualified hiring manager should know what a productive candidate is. 2- To mitigate recruitment risks when uncertainty is high, you go for the most polyvalent candidate. This is a useful approach, if the tasks varies and/or if the turnover rate is high. An ideal candidates should take problems off your shoulders, not add new ones. 3- I have never met an HR specialist who can describe to me their screening algorithm for the resumes. Most of the time the screening and the selection are improvised and often not objective. Recruiting is critical for the performance of the company. I do not understand why so many companies failed to understand this. 🤔