3 ms·
I see it as placement of the gatekeeping filter. Do you trust HR or the hiring team more to filter candidates? It's a valid question. Keyword / minimums tilt
by ethbr0 5y ago
I see it as placement of the gatekeeping filter.
Do you trust HR or the hiring team more to filter candidates?
It's a valid question. Keyword / minimums tilt the balance in HR's direction. Whiteboard / algorithm questions tilt towards hiring team.
I essentially hired one guy I interviewed because he seemed intelligent and did motorcycle work on his own. Had some background in the specific subject, but I'd rather hire a demonstrated ability to learn & initiative. (Afaict, he's thriving and a great fit for the position)
- wolverine876 5y ago> I essentially hired one guy I interviewed because he seemed intelligent and did motorcycle work on his own. Had some background in the specific subject, but I'd rather hire a demonstrated ability to learn & initiative. Me too, and I respond similarly to information like that. But the #1 hiring bias is hiring people like yourself. It's possibly I am just falling victim to that bias.
- 908B64B197 5y ago> It's a valid question. Keyword / minimums tilt the balance in HR's direction. Whiteboard / algorithm questions tilt towards hiring team. Keywords are almost always pointless. I've seen extraordinary resumes that ticked all the boxes, yet 20 minutes in there was not a working FizzBuzz on the door.
- UncleOxidant 5y agoProblem is, as the hiring manager you're not going to see the resumes that didn't meet the keyword minimum. You're only seeing the resumes that made it through the filters.
- 908B64B197 5y agoEngineering managers should dictate the filter to HR, not the other way around. If it's the other way around, that's a big red flag.