3 ms·
Another option would be to hire fairly leniently, but prune ruthlessly and early. In most jurisdictions, there is a trial period of sorts, typically 60 to 90 d
by johan_larson 12y ago
Another option would be to hire fairly leniently, but prune ruthlessly and early.
In most jurisdictions, there is a trial period of sorts, typically 60 to 90 days, during which it is easy to fire an employee, before various rules about dismissal kick in. As far as I know, most companies don't really make use of this, except in really serious cases.
But assuming it is in fact easy to fire during this period, we could hire somewhat loosely, and then carefully evaluate the progress of the employee at the 60-day mark. And just dismiss the ones who aren't making good progress. We might dismiss half the hires early.
- jarek 12y agoHow long until you run out of applicants willing to take the risk of having to restart their job search after they've settled down?
- Terr_ 12y agoAssuming we only care about applicants who believe themselves to be competent, that depends how much they trust you not to make false-positives. "They let a lot of their hires go in the first month, but that won't happen to me."
- johan_larson 12y agoHard to say. Most people over-estimate themselves and figure they won't be the ones to get cut. It would also make sense to be clear about the trial period right up front, so people don't "settle down" too early. The real problem would be hiring people who need to move.