3 ms·
Here's what recruiters see: 1) Oh, it's not the same tech stack, our client isn't going to want to look at this, 2) This person either can't dedicate themselves
by peterwwillis 7y ago
Here's what recruiters see: 1) Oh, it's not the same tech stack, our client isn't going to want to look at this, 2) This person either can't dedicate themselves to one career or is taking any job they can find. And the client sees 3) Our past contractors have built the crappiest products that aren't in sync with our patterns.
I basically work for RegularCo. And I can tell you, the one person they don't need any more of is a "Chad". They have so many "Chads". I'm sure you know one; white hetero male, 20s-30s, christian/atheist, good education, lots of opportunity, all using the same tech stacks that follow the same trends, no leadership experience, hyper-focused on technology rather than what it's being used to accomplish. If they have SV experience it's usually for a higher-paying, trendier job than they advertise for. They're obsessed with the best practice, the latest and greatest, and they get visibly upset when this isn't the case. RegularCo just wants to ship something.
All recruiters would send us is "Chads". We'd beg (and even threaten) them not to send any more god damn "Chads", and still that's all we got. We'd even look for alternatives on personal time.
You know who we wanted? Old, queer people of color. Junior People with 15+ years experience. People just getting their start. People with diverse backgrounds. People hungry to learn and build things. And most importantly, compassionate, ethical, sane people who want to cooperate and get things done. It is depressing how hard this is to find.
RegularCo isn't based in California or SV, doesn't need to impress VCs, and almost nothing they'd use is trendy. They're a regular company that uses regular tech to make products. But they don't want to hire another "Chad". Unfortunately, they have to hire somebody, so they end up settling for "Chad" after holding out for a year.
Ultimately, what the recruiter wants is different from what the company as a whole wants, and may be different than what a specific team may want. A single resume may get passed around within a company a dozen times over a year until somebody has the budget and timing to hire them. It's really stupid and there's no simple solution for it.
- yowlingcat 7y agoSounds like a problem with recruiting, which isn't that surprising to me. As I've ranted about before, great recruiters are worth their weight in gold. On the other side of things, subpar recruiters are a risk. At best, they'll bumble around and never find you appropriate candidates but at worst, they'll actively alienate candidates that could have been a great fit. It's a high risk, high reward profession. For some reason, you see a lot of clowns in it -- it always confuses me and has me convinced that executives and hiring managers don't fully understand what they should expect from recruiters and how to find an effective one.