Digging too much in the personal side of the candidate may be considered intrusive in his privacy and not relevant for the position.
If the candidate performs well in the position I don't see why his personal side should take an important role in the scale of hiring marks. It also depends on the kind of position.
Character values are definitely important and appreciated but by no means the person in charge of interviwing the candidates should put him in a situation where the candidate should answer too much about his personal life.
Yes you are right chemistry is really important during the hiring process and look (candidates and resumes lool) can be deceiving. I would advise that you have to dig deeper during the interview focus more with the personal side of the interviewee because it will always reflect what kind of person he / she is.
I agre with the two main hiring mistakes listed on this post, however a third one will be that sometimes the company want the best people for the less amount of salary... sometimes they want the qualifications ot be in the Sky, but their salary is not competitive in the market.
at the end it's all about chemistry between the one who is going to be the new boss and the new hired.
These are all great comments. I keep coming back to two fundamental pieces of tech that should become policy. 1. Get management to define the post before anyone starts to recruit. We often put the emphasis on the individual and not on the post or the product it needs to create. Don't believe me? Ask a staff member where his is on the org chart and he may start to draw out dotted lines and report-to's. That is not the priority. 2. Apply a brief $100 assessment to the candidate you're seriously considering. You'll find out where some things about his/her aptitude and IQ that you just won't pick up in an interview.
I would like to add in the Top Hiring Mistakes the following:
* In many companies the recruiters give their attention in many other things and do not focusing in the skills of the candidates. For example, when they are evaluating a person adversely based on his or her appearance.
** Sometimes the candidates have to fill in, many pages of psychologically test, and they be evaluated from those without to pass a personal interview with the recruiters.
Your article hit right on the spot. As a matter of fact, some of my dear friends have experienced the exact same situations as you described. The recruiting process took 5 months. The company wasn't really going after good employees. They think that the market is so tough that people cannot find a job easily. In fact, that's far from the truth. Ideal candidates aren't easy to come by. If the company really cares, they should be a bit quicker.
An organization should give maximum freedom to manager for recruting an engineer for his team. He is the best perosn who knows his current and future requirements. All other person may play supportive role to facilitate this procedure and control it within organizational values.
I have seen very successful team build by smart managers. This may be effective way of reducing the process time. Recruiters are time and again highly ineffective. Unless recruiters has 10 to 15 years of hands-on experience working in same role (e.g. designer, QA, manufactuirng engineer etc), he does not understand most of the requirement of manager. Normal prgression should be that manager with long recruitment experience should become recruitment person.
for this article the right words that fits in is Decision pending, Post on hold. Simple a too many people should not be brought into loop for the process. Though there are loads of books return on recruitment and Policies.
All the companies hsould make the process standardised accorning to different fields i thinks its easier for both the company and candidate the rate of hiring the right candidate will be high as the timeliness will be the same and other companies will not grab the same candidate.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
While no one really can accurately predict the future, we can take guidance from another Drucker saying which is the best way to predict the future is to create it.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.