7 ms·

I broadly agree with the basic point this guy is making, we have an issue where the HR gatekeepers (who don't have the knowledge to make accurate technical asse

by Aloha 8y ago

I broadly agree with the basic point this guy is making, we have an issue where the HR gatekeepers (who don't have the knowledge to make accurate technical assessments) are effectively searching for a perfect match, rather than someone who could do the job well. Don't put box tickers in charge of a critical function unless you want every thing they touch to be turned into an exercise in box ticking.

solipsism 8y ago
Easy to blame it all on HR. I've witnessed many engineers draft reqs that included all kinds of unnecessary "musts".
- tomrod 8y ago
  HR is the cause of this issue, either the ossified silo, or the general company policy to HR, which results in too big of asks for too low of wage from folks that have to use that policy.
  - hopler 8y ago
    It's tautological to say that bad HR policies are the cause of bad HR policies.
    - tomrod 8y ago
      Right. HR professionals (and the c-suite) are the cause of bad HR policies. Bad HR policies perpetuate bad HR policies after that.
  - solipsism 8y ago
    You can keep saying this but it's just not true. In the number of companies in which I've been involved, engineering managers are solely responsible for writing the reqs. HR is just an easy scapegoat. I'm sure that often HR is primarily responsible, but often HR just works with what they're given.
    - tomrod 8y ago
      Tell me about the approval process, training, and underlying incentives the engineering managers have to go through to get their requisition approved and posted. A priori, I'm confident it is a bad HR process.
dvtrn 8y ago
Conway’s Law strikes again?
amenod 8y ago
Yeah right! This is not a problem of the HR, this is a problem of the upper management. HR is only doing what they are paid to do, and if there is no oversight how they do it the it's an issue with the leadership. But I don't buy that. I think they are trying to buy "suckers" and only shell out for "experts" when they really need to. Unfortunately I think they are hurting themselves, but hey, it's a free world...
- Frost1x 8y ago
  The theory is that the market adjusts to compensate so in theory, competitors will offer reasonable opportunities. The practice is that a culture had been subscribed to across the board and there's no shortage or urgency because if there was, these positions would loosen or employers would be more aggressive and even offer training instead of leaving needed positions unfilled.
- Aloha 8y ago
  Its if you let HR be the sole gatekeeper where the problem stems however
raghava 8y ago
> HR gatekeepers (who don't have the knowledge to make accurate technical assessments) are effectively searching for a perfect match, rather than someone who could do the job well. IMO, that's just a symptom. The real problem is that the hiring managers/engineers find the job of "recruitment" beneath them. All of us know the recruiter might not really understand the difference between "java", "scripting" and "javascript". But then, why should that role exist? That role exists because the engineers/managers/leads/architects (generally, the tech folks) just don't want to do the grunt work (search and source candidates, co-ordinate and schedule interviews etc). The actual folks in need of teammates/additional people want a piece of the action alright, nobody wants to miss being an interviewer where one gets to go on a power trip asking the poor candidate to balance B+ trees or some such thing, while letting out tch-tch noises like a lizard watching the poor candidate struggle on the whiteboard. All that needs to be around is a tool/system that can make the job of searching/sourcing/co-ordination easier for the actual hiring managers/leads who are looking to add people to their teams and have got the necessary budgetary stuff covered already.
- cheschire 8y ago
  Have you ever had to sift through 300 resumes for an open position? Did you ever have to do it multiple times in a quarter? If you have time to do that, and do it well, and still hit your numbers, congrats.
  - lordnacho 8y ago
    I've done that, and during peak hiring periods it does get a bit intense, but I think it's essential it's done by a coder, not an HR person. It's also something to give your day a bit of variety. And the big plus is you get to decide who you want to work with.
    - abledon 8y ago
      Do you think Resumes made in LaTeX get screwed by the HR robot screening programs that scan documents for keywords? I mean, if your document has some weird formatting going on, I could see the program miss some crucial keywords buried inside a nested table or something
samkater 8y ago
On the flip side, I had the pleasure of working with a fantastic HR recruiter at my previous company. He would do a ton of legwork to ensure applicants had the basic level of skills and, frankly, common sense. For one position we were hiring, every single applicant he forwarded to us we interviewed and wanted to hire. There is a common thread here that great tech skills are under appreciated or often missed by HR, but I think great HR skills are also under appreciated by tech sometimes. If you find someone in HR recruiting who really is a “partner”, they are worth every penny.
- lordnacho 8y ago
  > every single applicant he forwarded to us we interviewed and wanted to hire But doesn't that support what the article says? It suggests he applies a filter with very few false positives, which generally can only be done at the expense of a lot of false negatives.
  - the_jeremy 8y ago
    No, because there is no shortage. If he is forwarding them multiple candidates they want to hire, there's no problem.
mattrp 8y ago
1000% agree. Drives me nuts when they demand experience in xyz. Xyz = some SaaS or library that no one uses but would literally take anyone with a pulse an afternoon to become competent.
Gpetrium 8y ago
There are usually 2 reasons why a company/individual hires someone else (1) expertise & (2) time. (1) An HR employee is hired to cover certain areas (recruiting in this case) of expertise that the individual manager may not have or may be biased towards. (2) Manager(s) may look to outsource a segment of their work. In most cases, it is a combination of the two that leads to HR being the gatekeeper. I would argue that if there was no HR, society would simply blame the next person in charge of the hiring segment.
gist 8y ago
> are effectively searching for a perfect match, rather than someone who could do the job well. Maybe they actually aren't doing either. Perhaps they are simply building a log of candidates for a position that does not exist currently but may exist or another future hypothetical position related or unrelated. In other words doing the legwork way in advance and figuring if they dangle a large enough offer (at that time) someone will leave what they are doing and join the company.

by Aloha 8y ago

solipsism 8y ago

Easy to blame it all on HR. I've witnessed many engineers draft reqs that included all kinds of unnecessary "musts".

tomrod 8y ago
HR is the cause of this issue, either the ossified silo, or the general company policy to HR, which results in too big of asks for too low of wage from folks that have to use that policy.
- hopler 8y ago
  It's tautological to say that bad HR policies are the cause of bad HR policies.
  - tomrod 8y ago
    Right. HR professionals (and the c-suite) are the cause of bad HR policies. Bad HR policies perpetuate bad HR policies after that.
- solipsism 8y ago
  You can keep saying this but it's just not true. In the number of companies in which I've been involved, engineering managers are solely responsible for writing the reqs. HR is just an easy scapegoat. I'm sure that often HR is primarily responsible, but often HR just works with what they're given.
  - tomrod 8y ago
    Tell me about the approval process, training, and underlying incentives the engineering managers have to go through to get their requisition approved and posted. A priori, I'm confident it is a bad HR process.

dvtrn 8y ago

Conway’s Law strikes again?

amenod 8y ago

Yeah right! This is not a problem of the HR, this is a problem of the upper management. HR is only doing what they are paid to do, and if there is no oversight how they do it the it's an issue with the leadership. But I don't buy that. I think they are trying to buy "suckers" and only shell out for "experts" when they really need to. Unfortunately I think they are hurting themselves, but hey, it's a free world...

Frost1x 8y ago
The theory is that the market adjusts to compensate so in theory, competitors will offer reasonable opportunities. The practice is that a culture had been subscribed to across the board and there's no shortage or urgency because if there was, these positions would loosen or employers would be more aggressive and even offer training instead of leaving needed positions unfilled.
Aloha 8y ago
Its if you let HR be the sole gatekeeper where the problem stems however

raghava 8y ago

> HR gatekeepers (who don't have the knowledge to make accurate technical assessments) are effectively searching for a perfect match, rather than someone who could do the job well. IMO, that's just a symptom. The real problem is that the hiring managers/engineers find the job of "recruitment" beneath them. All of us know the recruiter might not really understand the difference between "java", "scripting" and "javascript". But then, why should that role exist? That role exists because the engineers/managers/leads/architects (generally, the tech folks) just don't want to do the grunt work (search and source candidates, co-ordinate and schedule interviews etc). The actual folks in need of teammates/additional people want a piece of the action alright, nobody wants to miss being an interviewer where one gets to go on a power trip asking the poor candidate to balance B+ trees or some such thing, while letting out tch-tch noises like a lizard watching the poor candidate struggle on the whiteboard. All that needs to be around is a tool/system that can make the job of searching/sourcing/co-ordination easier for the actual hiring managers/leads who are looking to add people to their teams and have got the necessary budgetary stuff covered already.

cheschire 8y ago
Have you ever had to sift through 300 resumes for an open position? Did you ever have to do it multiple times in a quarter? If you have time to do that, and do it well, and still hit your numbers, congrats.
- lordnacho 8y ago
  I've done that, and during peak hiring periods it does get a bit intense, but I think it's essential it's done by a coder, not an HR person. It's also something to give your day a bit of variety. And the big plus is you get to decide who you want to work with.
  - abledon 8y ago
    Do you think Resumes made in LaTeX get screwed by the HR robot screening programs that scan documents for keywords? I mean, if your document has some weird formatting going on, I could see the program miss some crucial keywords buried inside a nested table or something

samkater 8y ago

On the flip side, I had the pleasure of working with a fantastic HR recruiter at my previous company. He would do a ton of legwork to ensure applicants had the basic level of skills and, frankly, common sense. For one position we were hiring, every single applicant he forwarded to us we interviewed and wanted to hire. There is a common thread here that great tech skills are under appreciated or often missed by HR, but I think great HR skills are also under appreciated by tech sometimes. If you find someone in HR recruiting who really is a “partner”, they are worth every penny.

lordnacho 8y ago
> every single applicant he forwarded to us we interviewed and wanted to hire But doesn't that support what the article says? It suggests he applies a filter with very few false positives, which generally can only be done at the expense of a lot of false negatives.
- the_jeremy 8y ago
  No, because there is no shortage. If he is forwarding them multiple candidates they want to hire, there's no problem.

mattrp 8y ago

1000% agree. Drives me nuts when they demand experience in xyz. Xyz = some SaaS or library that no one uses but would literally take anyone with a pulse an afternoon to become competent.

Gpetrium 8y ago

There are usually 2 reasons why a company/individual hires someone else (1) expertise & (2) time. (1) An HR employee is hired to cover certain areas (recruiting in this case) of expertise that the individual manager may not have or may be biased towards. (2) Manager(s) may look to outsource a segment of their work. In most cases, it is a combination of the two that leads to HR being the gatekeeper. I would argue that if there was no HR, society would simply blame the next person in charge of the hiring segment.

gist 8y ago

> are effectively searching for a perfect match, rather than someone who could do the job well. Maybe they actually aren't doing either. Perhaps they are simply building a log of candidates for a position that does not exist currently but may exist or another future hypothetical position related or unrelated. In other words doing the legwork way in advance and figuring if they dangle a large enough offer (at that time) someone will leave what they are doing and join the company.