3 ms·
They are also incredibly risk-averse. Even though they they have a no-risk, probationary period during which they can release an employee who's not working out,
by RougeFemme 13y ago
They are also incredibly risk-averse. Even though they they have a no-risk, probationary period during which they can release an employee who's not working out, they are deathly afraid of hiring someone who's not perfect. And a 90% fit simply won't do; they must be guaranteed of a 100% fit. In the meantime, their current employees are stretched beyond their limits, deadlines are missed OR made with a very high price (team morale, long-term productivity, other missed deadlines), the business becomes more tactical than strategic, etc. And if things eventually go to hell in a handbasket, it's blamed on the "lack of qualified applicants".
- maerF0x0 13y agoEmployers also forget the cost of not hiring someone. The value of the work not done, missed opportunity etc all add up. So basically the economic is something like [Cost of Not Hiring] = [Value of Missed work] - (1- ([%fit of applicant])) * [cost of employee mismatch] ;