Experience versus Education - Subjective?
Is it your belief that during the review of your overall career information by a recruiter or hiring manager, he or she is being as objective as possible? I’d have to agree with you that in most cases you are right; I’d wager they are objective more than 80% of the time. But, what about that other 20% of the time? You know, those calls or interviews where you were left to wonder, “What happened, anyway?”
Have you ever sensed during a phone screen or interview, either with the sourcer/recruiter or the hiring manager, there was something just not right with their tone, the direction of the questions, or even the consistency of the subject matter covered at different stages in the process? Hopefully you kept notes of the key concerns during the conversation? Because later, as you walk through or replay the conversation, a pattern might emerge to provide you a key insight into your inability to get that dream job.
In the field of quality, scatter grams enable you to perform an activity known as defect density analysis (I will refrain from getting into Poisson, DPMO, and Sigma, OK?!). This invaluable information gives you an opportunity to redirect your efforts early with greater precision and efficacy. If, however, your test reference is influenced, or weighted, by a single attribute or input sample, the density of error(s) can be skewed resulting in a false indication. In fact, for each iteration, if a different attribute is utilized at a higher concentration, your resulting data is completely useless. One needs to be consistent across all phases and with all forms of input to get the best predictive result possible.
Stick with me here while we go through a simple hypothetical scenario. Upon reviewing your notes of the phone screen a pattern emerged uncovering a particularly obvious focus, or weighting, on your education and less on your experience. Then, your notes regarding the interview process with the hiring manager (et al) uncovers a heavier than expected influence on your work experience. Based on the very simple density analysis process outlined in the previous paragraph, the result is a pretty obvious false indication. Remember, that false indication will greatly affect your candidacy and you’ll quickly drop off the radar. Weighting a different attribute over another at different stages of the process, therefore, is not a best practice anyone would ever view as, well, best.
School work, while helpful and supportive in a learning context, does not always prove the creativity in, or mastery of, a specific body of domain knowledge in the field. On the job work experience, while powerful and clearly a result of hard work and focus, doesn’t always translate into the best ability to excel in a particular domain, either. Allowing for differing perspectives or proclivities of the individuals on the reviewing team, the entire team must decide at the outset whether one attribute will have significant influence (EDU:60 - EXP:40) or if there should be parity (EDU:50 - EXP:50). Once the decision has been made to choose one over the other, stick with it to the end of the hiring cycle and ensure all participants remain consistent when interacting with the candidate pool.
If you had a tool that allowed you to lock in the percentage of influence (EDU:55 - EXP:45), do you believe your hiring process would be more effective and result in the best candidate joining your team? Let us know …
Staff IT Right© knows … let us help you … it’s sooo much fun firing on all cylinders!!!
TAGS: defect density, candidacy, Staff IT Right, Intelligent Business Resourcing, staffing, sourcing, recruiting, parity, objectivity
January 26th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
most of that went straight over my head! I am sometimes in the position of interviewing new people, it will be more often with my new company. I’ve looked into all sorts of psychometric test and wotnot but generally I end up recommending the people that can successfully complete a set of example tasks that they would potentially have to do ‘on the job’.
if someone can’t get into the guts of a html page to find out why a particular section isn’t working, I don’t care if they have 4 years education and a BSc in computer science. If they have no formal qualifications but they respond to tasks with the gusto of a computer enthusiast then that’s the type of person I want working for me! You can always teach an enthusiastic person but mostly, you can’t make an educated person enthusiastic.
Andy Bailey’s last blog post..iMaingo Portable Speakers £37.50 + 0.50 P&P
January 26th, 2008 at 1:06 pm
Andy, you’ve nailed it! The reason for our product is to weed out this idea that it’s education only that makes a great employee. Often times even the experience has too much weighting, from the perspective of the recruiter. If one could _level_ the field utilizing an objective process, then all we need to know is if this new candidate is a good fit. Right?
Then, you can fall back on the types of questions like, “So, if I give you this 4 page deep site, what can you do with it and make it rock solid?” or, “So, were you ever, or do you have an inkling to be, an ax-murderer?” …
Obviously, you’d want to refrain from upsetting the latter of those two … eh?
January 26th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
I’ve worked for more than 10 companies, dipping into the HR pool when it comes to recruiting resources. In my opinion, finding candidates for work is no different from finding candidates for your personal life. Every person has a unique desire to achieve some professional goal, and the person interviewing has the same needs as the candidate, the recruiter, individuals on the team, the managers, the CTO, the CEO, etc.
In the 80’s and 90’s there was a lot of obfuscation of education and political relationship-haranguing that sealed the envelope for the “Old Boys Network.” Now, it’s just not pragmatic with the rate of new ideas, new businesses, new money, and complications drawn from the drama of that obfuscation.
As an engineer, one tends to eschew drama, and seek out the most pragmatic means to achieve the common team and corporate goal = make money. I believe that in today’s workforce environment, responsible hiring and relationship-oriented interviewing surpass all standards of seeking out candidates with an attractive educational background. I do not believe a scholastic moniker will provide any hiring manager a significant context to replace current human interaction.
I’ve always recruited where I ended up liking the team. That personable bond has been, in my experience, from a pool of internal referrals, drawn to the characteristics and common personality types in the team. I’ve interviewed PhDs, cryptographers, ex-professors, with insanely brilliant engineers, but in the end, had to say no for key reasons:
1. Not amenable to change and frenetic market conditions
2. Hyper-focused, unable to flex in other areas to cross-pollinate talent
3. Political and/or dishonest
Sorry for the long-winded reply, but staffing is one of those areas I always considered entering, partly for my fondness with networking and trying to help others find a good, solid job in this crazy world.
February 6th, 2008 at 2:05 am
I’ve gotta say, I never ever had a problem getting a job if I made it to an interview. The chances of my CV getting me an interview was directly proportional to the lack of recruitment agencies in the loop.
The problem was, from my perspective, that if your experience was in any way different from the ordinary corporate grind, recruitment agencies would bin you from the word go, without even giving me an opportunity to interview.
If your product helps people hire without going through those idiots, I believe it stands to make a material contribution to the productivity of the entire planet. Good luck
February 6th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
PhiRatE - it would be callous of me to assume that we do not need recruiters or HR folks. While I can truly relate to your concern, the tool we are developing goes a looong way to improving the work flow. The key is HOW you as a candidate gets from out there in the CV-world to sitting in the seat to interview (where it’s then all up to US to get the job).
My other posts are covering the primary pain-points we all face. I am currently out on the market. I’ve been on the market a ton. If I’ve been in the software field since 1990, interviewing for software/hardware jobs only, you gotta believe I KNOW how messed up this work flow is! In fact, Margaret’s points above are quite similar to yours … it’s rampant and needs fixing.
There are tons of tools out there that these hiring firms are using. There are tons of tools that the HR teams are using. AND, there are tons of places where we all list ourselves to be found. Not one of these areas/tools/processes makes the process any better for the CANDIDATE! And, there is SO MUCH MONEY flying around, trying to make it better, yet we (the candidate) get the shaft …
It isn’t the fault of the recruiter at all. It isn’t the fault of the HR team. And, it isn’t the fault of the candidate …
I’m lookin’ these other tools square in the eye and saying, “It’s these tools that are making this EVEN worse - BEGONE!” …
Heh-heh-heh … we’ll make this better! Keep an eye on us …
April 13th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Great article!
As we move from the Industrial Age to the Information Age I think we’re going to find that experience and ability rank far higher than mere education.
I’d personally agree with Andy, show me that you can do it and I’ll turn you loose on it.
Thanks for bringing up a great subject,
Robert Morgen
The Spiritual Entrepreneur - http://sae.holisticplus.org/
New Paradigm Media - http://thedowhatyoulove.com
Check out my FREE Affiliate Program. Learn to develop PASSIVE Income! - http://abe5.com/1cs
Robert Morgen’s last blog post..Four Factors When Studying Affiliate Opportunities