5 ms·

I think many people write their job description's requirements, as if it were the opening stage of a negotiation. You list everything you want as if it were a

I think many people write their job description's requirements, as if it were the opening stage of a negotiation. You list everything you want as if it were a requirement, and you will only get about half of that. But the problem is, it isn't a negotiation, it's a minimum spec (especially if you put the word "required" next to that line), and so many quite good candidates won't apply. However, typically, I see 20-30 requirements, many of which (e.g. "passionate about software development", "good communicator") aren't specific enough to tell the candidate whether they are a good match or not (do poor communicators know they are poor communicators?). Of the rest, really only 2 or 3 are actual requirements, and the candidate has to guess which those are.

JustSomeNobody 8y ago
> e.g. "passionate about software development", "good communicator" Yeah, this is where bias and other cruft comes creeping in. "Passionate about software development" usually means, "our PM sucks, but he's the CEO's nephew, so you're going to work late to meet deadlines".
- chaosite 8y ago
  Or it could mean "our HR dept likes flowery language in job postings". I.e., it means literally nothing.
  - bausshf 8y ago
    Both are synonyms
cimmanom 8y ago
But then there's that research that shows that on average, men will apply to a job if they meet less than half of of the requirements, so if you don't overspecify you'll be flooded with crap applications. Of course, then you get the research that women will apply only if they meet >90%, so the overspeccing contributes to gender imbalances.
- rossdavidh 8y ago
  I think the population of those who apply when they shouldn't, and those who don't apply when they should, are probably different populations. In some cases, you want the population of people who are overconfident, or able to "fake it 'til you make it". But in many cases, you want the population who respect the project requirements as being real, and those might be the same people who treat the job requirements as being real. So, in at least some cases, you have created an anti-filter that will let through unsatisfactory candidates, but keep out satisfactory ones.
SilasX 8y ago
>I think many people write their job description's requirements, as if it were the opening stage of a negotiation. You list everything you want as if it were a requirement, and you will only get about half of that. But the problem is, it isn't a negotiation, it's a minimum spec (especially if you put the word "required" next to that line), and so many quite good candidates won't apply. They have the option to distinguish "minimum/required" vs "nice to have", though.
dfxm12 8y ago
so many quite good candidates won't apply. Shame on someone for writing unrealistic or unnecessary "requirements", but also shame on the engineer who doesn't even apply because of them. I wonder how truly good a candidate is if they get discouraged so easily. Maybe a hidden requirement 1 is showing a willingness to try to punch above one's weight or displaying some self confidence during the application process. After all, what's really the difference between 4 years of development experience in X language vs 5?
- pavon 8y ago
  I'll apply to a small company f I meet what seem like the most important of the requirementstc. . But it is a largedompany I assume that a large company filtered outjust by HR you don't meet 100% of the require. I've I used to but afterhaving never interview from ain those cases, 've stopped me.
- logfromblammo 8y ago
  I don't want to waste my own time on an activity I actively despise. I am perfectly willing to apply to a posting with missing requirements, right up until I have to create an account to apply, chop up my resume into pieces, and paste the bits into form boxes. That's when I say, "screw this, it wasn't a close match anyway". If the application process is "attach resume document to an email" then I might even spend some extra time on the cover email, explaining why am applying without being a 100% match for the requirements. The difference is the expectation of a payoff. That application management system is going to automatically filter out mismatches, and making me do all the work to disqualify myself as a candidate. The email might get read by an actual person with an interest in the outcome.
- linuxftw 8y ago
  Too many job requirements is a symptom of a bureaucratic hiring process, which is a symptom of a bureaucratic work environment. I've found cold-applying to these types of positions bares little fruit. On the flip side, I don't mind an overly ambitious position description if a recruiter has reached out to me. I know I have an actual human on the other end, and they have enough sense to determine I might actually be a good fit.
alistairSH 8y ago
We typically list a few must-haves and a slightly longer list of nice-to-haves.
- rossdavidh 8y ago
  A much preferable strategy.
mbesto 8y ago
> I think many people write their job description's requirements, as if it were the opening stage of a negotiation. As someone who has written and hired technical talent - this is absolutely true. > so many quite good candidates won't apply. I agree with your sentiment but generally disagree in practice. The reality is I get 100's of applications that are nowhere near qualified for positions I've listed. We're talking like recent grads applying for a VP of E-commerce (~10 years exp on the spec).
- techstrategist 8y ago
  Having many unqualified applicants is unrelated to how many good 50-75% candidates self-select against applying. It’s likely entirely different groups exhibiting the inverse effects of Dunning-Kruger.
  - mbesto 8y ago
    > how many good 50-75% candidates self-select against applying Got some data to back that up?
    - logfromblammo 8y ago
      Applying for a job costs time and effort. All other things being equal, I will prefer to apply to a job posting where I meet more of the requirements than one that is a looser match. Adding requirements that aren't actually requirements is a good way to get your posting sorted to the end of my applications queue indefinitely, or ignored entirely. I will apply to the closest matches first, and stop when I pass a time threshold. If your process costs me more than an hour, and I only tick off 50% of your listed requirements anyway, I'm probably never going to apply. There are all kinds of new postings, added daily, that will jump ahead of yours in my queue. So if I am searching while holding a job, I only apply to postings with the very highest estimated payoff, which are the very close matches. So, single point of anecdatum: I will self-select against applying. The threshold for matches depends on how motivated I am to change jobs. About now, I will even ignore 100% matches, if they don't have a salary range listed, and an easy application process.
hinkley 8y ago
I got a lot of traction in my early days simply ignoring the requirements and asking myself if I could do the job. Some skills can be picked up easily. Others are difficult to teach. You have a detail oriented position, you need a detail oriented person. If they’re sharp they can learn pretty much everything else. Hell I’ve taken over internationalization coding because I understand how grammar works in two languages and an inkling of Japanese grammar. I couldn’t translate a UI to save my life but the hard part is stitching sane sentences together from data.
Symmetry 8y ago
And there's the danger that by having your requirements too tight you've inadvertently created a asshole filter[1]. >An asshole filter happens when you publicly promulgate a straitened contact boundary and then don't enforce it; or worse, reward the people who transgress it. [1]https://siderea.livejournal.com/1230660.html https://siderea.livejournal.com/1230660.html

JustSomeNobody 8y ago

> e.g. "passionate about software development", "good communicator" Yeah, this is where bias and other cruft comes creeping in. "Passionate about software development" usually means, "our PM sucks, but he's the CEO's nephew, so you're going to work late to meet deadlines".

chaosite 8y ago
Or it could mean "our HR dept likes flowery language in job postings". I.e., it means literally nothing.
- bausshf 8y ago
  Both are synonyms

cimmanom 8y ago

But then there's that research that shows that on average, men will apply to a job if they meet less than half of of the requirements, so if you don't overspecify you'll be flooded with crap applications. Of course, then you get the research that women will apply only if they meet >90%, so the overspeccing contributes to gender imbalances.

rossdavidh 8y ago
I think the population of those who apply when they shouldn't, and those who don't apply when they should, are probably different populations. In some cases, you want the population of people who are overconfident, or able to "fake it 'til you make it". But in many cases, you want the population who respect the project requirements as being real, and those might be the same people who treat the job requirements as being real. So, in at least some cases, you have created an anti-filter that will let through unsatisfactory candidates, but keep out satisfactory ones.

SilasX 8y ago

>I think many people write their job description's requirements, as if it were the opening stage of a negotiation. You list everything you want as if it were a requirement, and you will only get about half of that. But the problem is, it isn't a negotiation, it's a minimum spec (especially if you put the word "required" next to that line), and so many quite good candidates won't apply. They have the option to distinguish "minimum/required" vs "nice to have", though.

dfxm12 8y ago

so many quite good candidates won't apply. Shame on someone for writing unrealistic or unnecessary "requirements", but also shame on the engineer who doesn't even apply because of them. I wonder how truly good a candidate is if they get discouraged so easily. Maybe a hidden requirement 1 is showing a willingness to try to punch above one's weight or displaying some self confidence during the application process. After all, what's really the difference between 4 years of development experience in X language vs 5?

pavon 8y ago
I'll apply to a small company f I meet what seem like the most important of the requirementstc. . But it is a largedompany I assume that a large company filtered outjust by HR you don't meet 100% of the require. I've I used to but afterhaving never interview from ain those cases, 've stopped me.
logfromblammo 8y ago
I don't want to waste my own time on an activity I actively despise. I am perfectly willing to apply to a posting with missing requirements, right up until I have to create an account to apply, chop up my resume into pieces, and paste the bits into form boxes. That's when I say, "screw this, it wasn't a close match anyway". If the application process is "attach resume document to an email" then I might even spend some extra time on the cover email, explaining why am applying without being a 100% match for the requirements. The difference is the expectation of a payoff. That application management system is going to automatically filter out mismatches, and making me do all the work to disqualify myself as a candidate. The email might get read by an actual person with an interest in the outcome.
linuxftw 8y ago
Too many job requirements is a symptom of a bureaucratic hiring process, which is a symptom of a bureaucratic work environment. I've found cold-applying to these types of positions bares little fruit. On the flip side, I don't mind an overly ambitious position description if a recruiter has reached out to me. I know I have an actual human on the other end, and they have enough sense to determine I might actually be a good fit.

alistairSH 8y ago

We typically list a few must-haves and a slightly longer list of nice-to-haves.

rossdavidh 8y ago
A much preferable strategy.

mbesto 8y ago

> I think many people write their job description's requirements, as if it were the opening stage of a negotiation. As someone who has written and hired technical talent - this is absolutely true. > so many quite good candidates won't apply. I agree with your sentiment but generally disagree in practice. The reality is I get 100's of applications that are nowhere near qualified for positions I've listed. We're talking like recent grads applying for a VP of E-commerce (~10 years exp on the spec).

techstrategist 8y ago
Having many unqualified applicants is unrelated to how many good 50-75% candidates self-select against applying. It’s likely entirely different groups exhibiting the inverse effects of Dunning-Kruger.
- mbesto 8y ago
  > how many good 50-75% candidates self-select against applying Got some data to back that up?
  - logfromblammo 8y ago
    Applying for a job costs time and effort. All other things being equal, I will prefer to apply to a job posting where I meet more of the requirements than one that is a looser match. Adding requirements that aren't actually requirements is a good way to get your posting sorted to the end of my applications queue indefinitely, or ignored entirely. I will apply to the closest matches first, and stop when I pass a time threshold. If your process costs me more than an hour, and I only tick off 50% of your listed requirements anyway, I'm probably never going to apply. There are all kinds of new postings, added daily, that will jump ahead of yours in my queue. So if I am searching while holding a job, I only apply to postings with the very highest estimated payoff, which are the very close matches. So, single point of anecdatum: I will self-select against applying. The threshold for matches depends on how motivated I am to change jobs. About now, I will even ignore 100% matches, if they don't have a salary range listed, and an easy application process.

hinkley 8y ago

I got a lot of traction in my early days simply ignoring the requirements and asking myself if I could do the job. Some skills can be picked up easily. Others are difficult to teach. You have a detail oriented position, you need a detail oriented person. If they’re sharp they can learn pretty much everything else. Hell I’ve taken over internationalization coding because I understand how grammar works in two languages and an inkling of Japanese grammar. I couldn’t translate a UI to save my life but the hard part is stitching sane sentences together from data.

Symmetry 8y ago

And there's the danger that by having your requirements too tight you've inadvertently created a asshole filter[1]. >An asshole filter happens when you publicly promulgate a straitened contact boundary and then don't enforce it; or worse, reward the people who transgress it. [1]https://siderea.livejournal.com/1230660.html https://siderea.livejournal.com/1230660.html