4 ms·
I’d love to see how this works out, because my rule of thumb is to not hire for potential. In my experience, including “potential” in the decision matrix is jus
by ungreased0675 2y ago
I’d love to see how this works out, because my rule of thumb is to not hire for potential. In my experience, including “potential” in the decision matrix is just a way of laundering bias and makes the process less objective. My managers must be able to answer why they’re hiring one person over another. If it’s too subjective, we might as well save time, skip the charades, and pick randomly.
- palata 2y agoIMHO it is random anyway. At least to some extent: you can check that the candidate seems somewhat competent (i.e. filter out all those who just cannot write code). But finding the one who would be the best fit for the position? No chance at all. I believe a big mistake is to focus on the technical skillset for hiring. And then you risk ending up with a team of supposedly "all stars" (which is often debatable) that hate each other, can't stop arguing or just create a toxic atmosphere. What I would do is try to find, among the candidates that seem competent enough, a good colleague. Someone with whom I will enjoy working. I am convinced that a team of friends will beat an individual jerk in the long run. It's great to have a team of superstars, but if they care more about their stock options than about your shitty product (really, who is proud of optimising Facebook's ad revenue? They must be there for the money), then maybe you are just building a company that will waste a lot of potential on a failed metaverse, or a failed VR headset, or a failed TikTok competitor.
- ungreased0675 2y agoAbsolutely agree with hiring competent enough people. Most companies that want 10x engineers don’t even have the infrastructure and processes in place to make use of one.