Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections
-
Because Monster/Indeed/etc are all fronts for legal purposes.
Everybody knows you get hired due to who you know
Bob in the mail room, his sister's old boyfriend's cousin's drinking buddy used a computer once, the cousin highly recommends him. HIRED! -
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
Everybody knows you get hired due to who you know
Bob in the mail room, his sister's old boyfriend's cousin's drinking buddy used a computer once, the cousin highly recommends him. HIRED!As much as we all hate that process, honestly, how is anyone short of the giant Fortune 1000 supposed to hire someone? Let's just take you, or Jared. Now... Midwest Propane Systems in Fargo needs a new IT Manager. They are driven to hire someone good, they pay well, they will relocate someone there, loads of great benefits....
Assuming zero nepotism and honestly wanting to hire someone good... how is MWPS going to locate any of us to know we might want that job?
-
Ignore that it is Fargo and none of us actually want that job.
-
Does their HR team post on sites like Monster / Indeed, or are they wanting to avoid the potential chaff that comes from those sites?
-
@dafyre said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
Does their HR team post on sites like Monster / Indeed, or are they wanting to avoid the potential chaff that comes from those sites?
you are still missing the damned point here...
-
Well from what I've seen when job hunting, is that any company with a little technical ability is going to have their own "Career" section right on their own website.
If I were in the job market and actually wanted to work for any large company be it a university or fortune whatever or just any company I happen to like, I'll go see if jobs are open on their own websites.
Even if I use a company like Monster first, just to notice a position, I'll then skip Monster and go strait to the corporate website to the career page. There usually is one.
Also, I would assume for larger companies, hiring from within the walls is the first/best bet. Promote someone up, and another and another, and then after promoting people all you have left are bottom level positions to fill.
-
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
Well from what I've seen when job hunting, is that any company with a little technical ability is going to have their own "Career" section right on their own website.
Right, which is useless, because that's why I mentioned the handful of large companies big enough for people to know about them.
-
@JaredBusch said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@dafyre said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
Does their HR team post on sites like Monster / Indeed, or are they wanting to avoid the potential chaff that comes from those sites?
you are still missing the damned point here...
And I can't understand the point unless I ask questions.
-
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
Also, I would assume for larger companies, hiring from within the walls is the first/best bet. Promote someone up, and another and another, and then after promoting people all you have left are bottom level positions to fill.
That's what the worst companies do, but obviously good ones cannot because the best people won't come work for you that way. Wegmans in NY does this, promoting all IT from the ranks of cashiers, and it shows. Even the most basic tasks need to be outsources and everything is shoddy, slow and costly.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
Also, I would assume for larger companies, hiring from within the walls is the first/best bet. Promote someone up, and another and another, and then after promoting people all you have left are bottom level positions to fill.
That's what the worst companies do, but obviously good ones cannot because the best people won't come work for you that way. Wegmans in NY does this, promoting all IT from the ranks of cashiers, and it shows. Even the most basic tasks need to be outsources and everything is shoddy, slow and costly.
This definitely makes sense - that other SME I worked for - internal promotion is not what most people wanted. If you were an internal promotion, it you likely given crappy compensation, because they would low ball you because they knew what position you were coming from (this assumed a low paying position moving to a normally much higher paying one).
-
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
Also, I would assume for larger companies, hiring from within the walls is the first/best bet. Promote someone up, and another and another, and then after promoting people all you have left are bottom level positions to fill.
That's what the worst companies do, but obviously good ones cannot because the best people won't come work for you that way. Wegmans in NY does this, promoting all IT from the ranks of cashiers, and it shows. Even the most basic tasks need to be outsources and everything is shoddy, slow and costly.
Are we talking about IT companies?
There is a huge benefit to promoting internal talent. I.e. they already know the work ethic and temperament and how they work with others. That they've shown some leadership ability and drive, or actually enjoy the work and the product. You don't get a lot of that in a couple job interviews. It's a safe bet to promote internal talent if you see the potential in someone to move up.
And what employee wouldn't like a fresh set of responsibilities and a nice pay bump?It's also a benefit to start people at low positions because you tend to get the beginners and new talent. People you can mold a little bit and grow into what the company needs.
This as opposed to hiring some veteran person stuck in their ways and has a hard shell for change.
I'm making an assumption that it's a bit easier to hire for lower positions than higher. Higher positions have more security clearance, more responsibilities, more control. That must be difficult to make the decision to hire.But obviously, what you described can happen too. I'm just surprised you think that is the norm rather than the exception.
-
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
There is a huge benefit to promoting internal talent. I.e. they already know the work ethic and temperament and how they work with others.
That's a bonus, but most of the time what they know is that they are not very good. Knowing someone is mediocre isn't all that great if you have to promote them anyway.
-
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
It's a safe bet to promote internal talent if you see the potential in someone to move up.
But in finance, a safe bet is a losing bet. It's like bonds, they are predictable, but predictably bad.
-
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
And what employee wouldn't like a fresh set of responsibilities and a nice pay bump?
Normally, good ones, because leaving the company normally provides even more pay bump and more experience. Staying in the same company means bubble syndrome and an inability to bring new value after your initial hire.
-
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
It's also a benefit to start people at low positions because you tend to get the beginners and new talent. People you can mold a little bit and grow into what the company needs.
This is very true, but only works if your mentors are amazing. If you don't have amazing senior staff, this becomes a negative because the youth get skewed with bad habits. It's also very hard to determine who is going to be great at 50 when they are 15.
-
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
This as opposed to hiring some veteran person stuck in their ways and has a hard shell for change.
I feel like this is more the opposite. You get stuck in your ways getting someone that has never left the one company. The only know one thing, they've only seen one thing, they've only done it one way, they know politics rather than IT, they move up normally because they know the system rather than their jobs (good people are less likely to move up compared to connected ones) and they tend to be change averse because that's why they didn't move on somewhere else.
It's people that have moved from company to company that are the least stuck in their ways. They have to be adaptable because they've been forced to adapt time and time again. They have broader perspective and are more likely, even at an older age, to adapt to changing needs, ideas and so forth.
-
I think we can just assume everybody is mediocre to some degree. Most of us just work for a paycheck after all.
So, the conversation seems to be changing from "how can companies find people?", to "how can companies find the absolute best people because existing talent is too mediocre?".
Well then my assumption here is that they steal the talent from other competing organizations!
-
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
I'm making an assumption that it's a bit easier to hire for lower positions than higher. Higher positions have more security clearance, more responsibilities, more control. That must be difficult to make the decision to hire.
I agree here. But good lower level people are more likely to leave you. If your process is to depend on hiring from within, you have a brain drain problem.
-
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
I think we can just assume everybody is mediocre to some degree. Most of us just work for a paycheck after all.
So, the conversation seems to be changing from "how can companies find people?", to "how can companies find the absolute best people because existing talent is too mediocre?".
Well then my assumption here is that they steal the talent from other competing organizations!
It needs to be from non-competing ones, normally. For both legal and fresh blood reasons. This is why I went to Wall St., in 2006, they wanted someone with the same level of experience but from another sector because I brought fresh perspectives to the financial realm. All of the corporate incest between the financial companies was killing innovation.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
@guyinpv said in Making Business to Candidate Hiring Connections:
I'm making an assumption that it's a bit easier to hire for lower positions than higher. Higher positions have more security clearance, more responsibilities, more control. That must be difficult to make the decision to hire.
I agree here. But good lower level people are more likely to leave you. If your process is to depend on hiring from within, you have a brain drain problem.
I would guess also that if you hire someone on the idea that it's a benefit they have worked for many companies, bouncing around and becoming adaptable, that you can also count on them leaving you also.
