Hiring Process, the truth behind the scenes

Where are the Candidates?

Hiring Process

A few years ago, I wrote a post on the hiring process titled “When do recruiters call back?” The premise was that it is easy to become frustrated when it takes a long time to hear back from a recruiter after the interview process begins. I wanted to shed some light on what is happening behind the scenes and why it can take so long to hear back. A good friend, Lewis Lin, sent me a short essay of observations below. He is a former hiring manager at Google and has written a couple of excellent books for Product Managers who are interviewing at Google. I read his observations and couldn’t help but bust out laughing at times, and crack a slight smile at others. I could see his frustration.

Disconnect

As an executive with a budget, a hiring manager evaluating candidates, and someone who does a fair share of recruiting for both individual contributors and executives, I could see the disconnect. I could see the strategy behind the recruiter he was working with. I thought it would be a fascinating post if we could approach it as a tag team, and he agreed. Lewis is asking questions from a hiring manager standpoint, and I am answering questions from a recruiting standpoint. I think both hiring managers and candidates would gain valuable insights from the perspectives of the other in their quest to fill positions and secure job offers.

Where the earlier post addressed candidates wondering, “When do recruiters call back?” this post is for both hiring managers and candidates wondering, “Why is the hiring process so flawed?”

The players

• Lewis Lin is represented in Blue, standing for freedom, justice, and the American way. A place where “anyone can make it”.
• HRNasty is represent’n in Black, standing for the all-evil HR department, its red tape and political correctness, except I won’t be very pc.

LL: As a hiring manager, here are my most significant pain points:

HRN: Bring it, dude

LL: (Hiring), It’s Not Shopping Mall Easy

If I need a computer, I go to Best Buy. If I need something to eat, I go to McDonald’s. Even if I need to buy a house, I can go to Redfin and see houses, either in person or virtually, in less than 24 hours.

That’s not the case if I have an open role on my team. I have to lobby my boss to get my open head approved. This takes somewhere between 3 and 6 months, and it never does.

Budget matters

HRN: I hear you. Especially with larger companies, where financial planning can take place 1–3 years out and, in some cases, 5 years out. Within these timeframes, numerous variables influence the hiring process. Although the department’s needs determine headcount, the hiring process is ultimately constrained by budget. If revenue doesn’t come in or projects are cut, getting headcount can be an endeavor in itself.

LL: Once the open head gets approved, I need to write the job description. I’m busy. But nobody on my team can do it for me. They’re either not experienced enough or it’s a sensitive topic. My recruiter can’t do it for me either. They’re either too busy or they aren’t mind readers. What ends up happening is this: if I have two hours, I’ll be thinking about writing the job description. If I don’t have two hours, I’ll probably cut and paste a job description I find, either internally or online. Once a job description is created, it gets reviewed by the recruiter. That takes at least 24 to 48 hours. Then it gets posted to the external website. This could take 3-4 days. All in all, getting a job description posted takes 1-2 weeks.

Recruiters don’t know

HRN: You are not going to like this, but there are plenty of times when recruiters do not have the expertise needed to write the job description. We haven’t done the job, and we don’t have your experience. If we had that level of knowledge, we would be applying for the job instead of sifting through a pile of chaff. I completely agree that the hiring manager and the employee who just left the position are probably the only folks qualified to write the job description. FWIW, if you asked me to write the job description, unless it is for an account manager I know intimately (we hire them by the dozen), I would probably go to existing job descriptions and cut and paste the bullets from other job descriptions. This is why so many job descriptions read the same.  

LL: Then, I wait for resumes. Days, sometimes weeks, go by, and I don’t receive a single resume. Sometimes there’s a bug in the posting process. At other times, my recruiter insists on reviewing my resume with me. But my calendar is jam-packed. The earliest my admin can schedule a meeting for the two of us is sometime next week. Another week passes.

HRN: As a recruiter, I don’t want to hit you up every time I get a single resume worth talking about. Unless the candidate is SUPER qualified and I am excited, you probably won’t hear from me till I have a few candidates worth discussing. Don’t worry, in the meantime, I am moving forward with these candidates and keeping the hiring process active. I am also moving forward on 15 other unrelated positions, but you are getting some love.

How are you spending your time?

LL: When we have the meeting, I receive only 5-7 resumes to review. That’s it?!?  I was expecting somewhere between 100 and 150. And why does it take a one-hour meeting to look at 5-7 resumes? I can quickly assess each one and decide whether it’s a fit or not in 6 seconds, sometimes even 3 seconds if needed. It has been three weeks since we began the process. And yes, somewhere between 90% and 100% of them are duds. My recruiter tells me that our meeting is helpful, which I don’t understand, because we’ve already wasted three weeks.

The recruiter promises me that there will be more (and more qualified) resumes next week. The recruiter will try new things, including posting on job boards, increasing LinkedIn outreach, and implementing a special employee referral program for me. To help the recruiter understand my needs, I suggest sitting in on my staff meetings.

It’s about control

HRN: This is where I started to crack a smile. I saw the strategy the recruiter was using. As a recruiter, I want to keep a tight rein on the hiring process. If I don’t, then I can have a wild horse on my hands, and I don’t want to play rodeo rider on a bull named Hiring Manager. FWIW, we did get 100 – 150 resumes, but of these, only 5-7 are in the ballpark, and of that, probably only 2-3 are R-E-A-L-L-Y qualified. I don’t want to waste your time. I really don’t want to sit in the same room as you while you get frustrated, throwing out 143 of the 150 resumes I already disqualified and taking your frustrations out on me.

Yes, I am serious. Overqualified, underqualified, and frankly, a good percentage are just applying so they can qualify for unemployment, so they don’t care where or what they are applying for. They want to confirm that they used and were declined for unemployment benefits purposes. Several applications are intentionally unqualified.

Goldilocks

When I consider a candidate, I don’t want someone underqualified, nor do I want someone overqualified. I am the hot blond Goldilocks, and I want “just right” because, as the hiring manager, YOU want “just right” as well. I only want what is best for you, of course! If I were to send the hiring manager 100 resumes, I would probably be asked to call 15 to 20 of the candidates. It is very easy for the hiring manager to request 15-20 phone screens because they are not doing the work.

They are not sending the emails, setting up the times, or getting declined or stood up. Additionally, they are not taking notes and organizing everything into an Applicant Tracking System. They are not working on this process for the other 15 – 20 open positions I am working on. We are ONLY going to hire 1 person. And it is very easy to go through 100 resumes and not see a single candidate who is eligible to go the distance. The hiring manager may like the candidate, but based on experience, I know that another person in the interview loop will:

• Give me a hard time about the college attended. (Not prestigious enough or too prestigious)
• Will want more or less corporate or small company experience.
• Look at the LinkedIn picture and give me the second degree because they look like a slob.

Dumbasses!

Very little of the above “feedback” will come across as suggestions. The feedback will come across as an accusation. “Are you serious? No more party schools, please,” with more than a hint of “What a dumbass, how hard can it be to find some resumes?” and a rolling of the eyes for good measure.  

When searching for a candidate, I consider not only the hiring manager’s opinion. If that were the case, this job would be a piece of strawberry shortcake. Finding a single candidate is easy. I am taking into account the entire interview loop, including the hiring manager’s boss. The more people involved in the interviews, the more complexity is introduced, as schedules, personalities, and, frankly, every interviewer has their own goal with this hire. Add someone young in their career and inexperienced with interviewing. Oiiyyy veayyy!

• The person conducting the onboarding is looking for someone who will be easy to train. He won’t endorse someone who comes across as a “know-it-all”.
• The single candidate will want a partner who is “cute” and a lot of fun.
• There will be an interviewer who doesn’t want to be involved in the interview process. Getting buy-in from this interviewer IS pulling teeth.
• There will be a fashionista who wants to see someone presentable. The most highly qualified candidate, wearing last year’s jeans, will earn me the neck roll from Mr. Shiny Shoes.
• There will be a highly experienced interviewer with extensive seniority and limited emotional intelligence. There is no way a junior candidate with very few interviews under their belt can measure up to this interviewer.

No chances here

I am not taking a chance that the hiring manager likes the candidate while three interviewers think otherwise. When that happens, I act as a middleman between the hiring manager and the interviewing loop. I need to say it in a way that doesn’t sound like any of the following:

• “I liked them a lot; talk to your hiring manager.”
• “Who am I? I don’t understand how being well-dressed makes a difference for this position.”
• “Well, if your buddy could get his dates and wasn’t using the HR department as his own personal SnapChat / Tinder, we might move this process forward.”

Heartache

I need to be politically correct and am not going to throw any interviewer under the bus. That is heartache, and as much as it is heartache for the hiring manager, it is all about me. I don’t want heartache, so I’m going with a candidate who I think can go the distance. This is not a battle of getting singles and doubles. This is a game of home runs. Getting to first base in this game isn’t going to cut it. Getting three candidates who make it halfway through the interview process is a waste of everyone’s time. I am swinging for home runs, and I will strike out.  

For the candidate, this isn’t so much about being qualified to do the job. This is about NOT PISSING OFF THE INTERVIEWERS.

LL: I give up. Six weeks have passed, and I’m more discouraged than ever. And it’s not due to a lack of trying. I spend 50% of my time trying to figure out how to fill an open position on my team. Time is ticking. If I don’t fill the open head, my boss will assign it to someone else. So I started sourcing my candidates, emailing old co-workers. Going over LinkedIn over and over again. Trying to figure out who I know that might be interested in joining.

HRN: LOL. Around this time, I start receiving emails from the hiring manager, with a copy to my boss. “Hey, 5 weeks and only three candidates? What gives? Can we open this up to more recruiters? Can we post this on Monster.com? (Oh goddd!) Where are you posting this? How many candidates have you talked with? I want to see some reports.” More reports mean more time spent on creating reports and less time spent sourcing candidates.

Sell Sell Sell

LL: The wine-and-dine process begins. If it’s a personal contact, I have to sell, sell, sell. If it’s someone I don’t know, I have to interview. The interview is such an inconsistent process. Rockstars on the phone interview are duds in person. And everyone has a different vibe. There are no unanimous decisions. Every candidate seems to be split 4-3, 4 in favor and three against.

HRN: Welcome to my world, and multiply that by 15 or 20 additional positions. I am going through the same process you are. I may have a few more tools at my disposal, but at the end of the day, this is a needle in a haystack and six different personalities, not including the wildcard candidate. The candidate could be:

• Using us for interview practice so when they get the interview they really want, they are back in fighting form. Like a champion boxer coming out of retirement, they will take a few minor league fights to get the kinks worked out.
• We’re just using us as a BATNA, so when they receive our job offer, they can go to the company they want to work for and get a higher offer.
• We move the candidate successfully through 4 or 5 interviews and one of OUR interviewers comes off as the asshole. The candidate decides they don’t want to work on this team. (Trust me, there is an order to who interviews when, and if I think I have a shot, I need this guy who lacks emotional intelligence to go last.) I can’t lead off with this interviewer, or I have NO shot.)
• After four interviews, the candidate decides they want more money. They are suddenly out of our budget, and we are back to square 1.

Not just the hiring manager

Remember, we are not just trying to fix the hiring manager’s problem, but also appeasing the five other interviewers in the hiring process. But this isn’t just about appeasing six interviewers. I am REALLY worried about how this candidate will look in 6 months. If they are struggling in six months, it will be the recruiter’s responsibility. If they are successful in 6 months, the hiring manager will take the credit and ask me to get one more just like the last one.

LL: 75% of the time, I land a candidate from my own personal networks. That’s right, after all this agony, I could have skipped all this recruiting bureaucracy and found the candidate on my own.

So, how can we avoid frustration with the hiring process? We can minimize it when the recruiter meets not just the hiring manager but the entire interview loop, so both parties can set clear expectations. Expectations on the process, the number of candidates to be expected, and the priorities of the skill sets, to name just a few. Do we need someone who is not only presentable but also has a high-maintenance fashion attitude? Getting consensus on the following:

• “This developer won’t be talking to customers; we don’t care how they are dressed.”
• “We have a project starting in 6 weeks, and if we don’t have a couple of viable candidates in 4 weeks, I recommend we get outside agency recruiters involved.”
• “Our budget is X, no signing bonus, no relocation bonus, etc.”
• Are we looking for a specific level of education?

Expectations

Being able to point back to preset expectations will open many eyes when the actual candidate stands in front of interviewers with a price tag hanging around their neck. Setting expectations will make resetting them much easier.  

I wish I had this conversation in my early years:

Hiring Manager: “We want skill sets X, Y, Z, and A with large company experience, and we want to pay 55K a year. They need to be able to assume a leadership position in the next 6 – 9 months.”

HRNasty: “I can get you 2 of the skill sets you are looking for at 55K a year in 6 weeks. I can provide you with three of the skills for $65,000 in 6 weeks or $55,000 in 8 weeks. I can provide all four skill sets, but it will cost 80K, which is 45% more than we budgeted. It will probably take 8 weeks. If you want them well dressed, we need to throw in a wardrobe bonus”.

Hopefully, the above clarifies not only what happens behind the scenes for Hiring Managers and candidates but also how the illusion of miscommunication can be reduced.

What methods are you using to get hiring managers and recruiters on the same page in the hiring process?  Please share your secrets with either a hiring manager or a recruiter in the comments below.

See you at the after party,

HRNasty

nasty: an unreal maneuver of incredible technique, something that is ridiculously good, tricky and manipulative but with a result that can’t help but be admired, a phrase used to describe someone who is good at something. “He has a nasty forkball”.

If you felt this post was valuable please subscribe here. I promise no spam,