I browse LinkedIn pretty often, and the category of things that appears most on that main feed are inspirational quotes by inspirational leaders. Folks like Richard Branson and Simon Sinek appear most often. More specifically, the quotes have a central theme to them: companies need to hire good people. For example, one of the latest quotes I've seen on my feed include this one from Tina Fey:
Jonathan Rosenberg in his book How Google Works argues that the answer to that is no. Moreover, he argues that the problem resides largely within hierarchical hiring.
"In most cases being a good boss means hiring talented people and getting out of their way."
That's a great sentiment, but is that really reinforced in reality?
Jonathan Rosenberg in his book How Google Works argues that the answer to that is no. Moreover, he argues that the problem resides largely within hierarchical hiring.
Just like the name suggests, hierarchical hiring is basically the way most people are hired in most organizations today: a manager (or group of managers) interview a pool of candidates and select from the "best" of that pool. There are two inherent problems with this though.
First, managers don't typically do the same scope of work that a hired employee does, and this holds true for pretty much every industry. Managers in an IT company aren't typically software developers themselves, and managers at McDonald's spend time on adminstrative activities over flipping patties. So why is it that one person is selecting a candidate for a role in which they are probably unfamiliar with themselves? It's akin to somebody like me recommending a fishing boat to a fisher: I don't fish, and the last time I was in a fishing boat was well over a decade ago. (The good ol' days!)
Second, and probably more importantly, human nature draws us toward protecting ourselves in what we perceive as a threat. In other words, we like to be the best in any situation, and hiring is not an exception. Rosenberg notes that this is doubly so when hiring "below" you because if a new hire ends up being "too good", then there is the perception that maybe that person should be a manager instead of the original manager.
Fortunately, there are remedies to this, and the one Google chooses to use is peer-based hiring. This solves the first problem quite simply in the fact that peers do the same work as the anticipated hire.
I honestly don't know if it solves the second question. Rosenberg sort of hints that it does in the book, but I'm still a bit skeptical. I think I do agree that it would alleviate the second problem to an extent, so I suppose something is better than nothing, especially if it solves the first problem.
Like anything, I won't proclaim to have the "silver bullet" answer for anything. The whole process is a bit odd to me. I get that it would eat a good chunk of a person's time to seek new hires themselves, but the usage of dedicated recruiters seems odd to me. There's only so much they can do.
Anyway, I hope this will alleviate at least one part of the hiring process. I will definitely share more as I continue to learn more.
Second, and probably more importantly, human nature draws us toward protecting ourselves in what we perceive as a threat. In other words, we like to be the best in any situation, and hiring is not an exception. Rosenberg notes that this is doubly so when hiring "below" you because if a new hire ends up being "too good", then there is the perception that maybe that person should be a manager instead of the original manager.
Fortunately, there are remedies to this, and the one Google chooses to use is peer-based hiring. This solves the first problem quite simply in the fact that peers do the same work as the anticipated hire.
I honestly don't know if it solves the second question. Rosenberg sort of hints that it does in the book, but I'm still a bit skeptical. I think I do agree that it would alleviate the second problem to an extent, so I suppose something is better than nothing, especially if it solves the first problem.
Like anything, I won't proclaim to have the "silver bullet" answer for anything. The whole process is a bit odd to me. I get that it would eat a good chunk of a person's time to seek new hires themselves, but the usage of dedicated recruiters seems odd to me. There's only so much they can do.
Anyway, I hope this will alleviate at least one part of the hiring process. I will definitely share more as I continue to learn more.
Comments
Post a Comment