4 ms·
The asymmetry of information the GP describes boils down to the asymmetry of power between employer and candidate. You aimed to resolve that uncomfortable tens
by hitekker 6y ago
The asymmetry of information the GP describes boils down to the asymmetry of power between employer and candidate.
You aimed to resolve that uncomfortable tension by exaggerating the power of the candidate. In fantasy, a "good hire" is a rockstar; an amazing, fantastic individual who exists on the same plane as their paymaster. Of course, this one person and this group of people see eye-to-eye; they're equals!
In reality, particularly in the job realities outside of software engineering, candidates and employers are not equals. The applicant is the supplicant; they compete to do one job for a low price and at low risk to the company. Rejection for that candidate is hardship: a month without a paycheck, a month of uncertainty. Whereas rejection for the average company is just another process, a few more days filling a recruitment pipeline.
Such disparity sets the stage for the interview and beyond: the candidate refrains from poking into the gray areas of company for fear of losing the offer, and the company rigorously dissects the candidate for their own enjoyment. Maybe, once the candidate starts the job and sees the company's ugliness, they'll question their decision. But in most cases I've seen, the employee bows to the simple truth that they need their employers more than their employers need them.
- MarblePillar 6y agoWould you say that candidate:employer::supplicant:benefactor::debtor:creditor?
- chii 6y ago> Whereas rejection for the average company is just another process, a few more days filling a recruitment pipeline. or the company fails because they can't hire a key employee. Companies that are competent in their business operation (not their domain, but the operation of running their business) will not suffer this hardship because they planned for it, and have put in redundancies or backups for business continuity. It is indeed harder for a human candidate to do the same - but not impossible. That's why the FIRE (Financial Independence Retire Early) principle has the idea that you need to have at least 6-12 months of emergency funding. If you get rejected, this funding can keep you going and you're not shit out of luck (and be forced to accept a subpar offer). The only problem is that most humans don't run their life like a business. But they should!