Tim Denning’s Post

So accurate and long overdue in implementing !

“Fire fast, hire slow” is probably a better way to think about recruitment. Yes the recruitment process needs to be efficient and move along at pace, but employers also need to be sure that they have a process which is going to give them the best possible hire, and this can take some time and multiple assessments. I do think 6 months is outrageous but I also think it’s going to depend somewhat on the role. If we are hiring a heart surgeon, an astronaut or a nuclear physicist then we want to be absolutely sure about who we hire and maybe that process will take several months. We aren’t going to rely on a probation period to determine whether or not we’ve made a good hire. Also, consider the cost. If an employer hires someone at $150,000 a year and that person stays for 7 years, then they’ve just made a $1 million purchasing decision. You would want to be really sure you were making the right choice on a million dollars. A two week hiring process might be okay for some lower level, less specialised jobs but I feel like all employers need to ensure a robust process, and sometimes that takes time. Remembering also that these are people we are talking about, not some disposable resource. #iotw

Communication is a key part applicable to both the sides..

The Costly Illusion: Lengthy Recruitment Processes As a seasoned professional, I've witnessed the allure of lengthy recruitment processes. Some believe that an extended evaluation period showcases a company's commitment to thoroughness—a sign of quality employers. But let me tell you, appearances can be deceiving. The Myth of Credibility Myth: "A lengthy process demonstrates our commitment to excellence." Reality: While diligence matters, excessive delays harm both candidates and businesses. Candidates experience frustration, and your brand reputation takes a hit. It's like sipping fine wine while your house is on fire—impressive, but utterly misplaced. The Candidate's Dilemma Imagine being a candidate caught in this web. You submit your resume, wait, and wait some more. Days turn into weeks. Meanwhile, other opportunities beckon. You're not holding your breath; you're gasping for air. And when the offer finally arrives, the candidates moved on. The Unseen Costs Remember my friend's wife? Eight months of interviews, tests, and flights across the USA. The chosen candidate declined, opting for greener pastures. When then they went back to my friends wife, as their first choice declined, she has already went with another employer. The business? Thousands spent, reputation tarnished, and talent pool drained. A cautionary tale. The True Measure So, what truly defines a great employer? Not the length of your process, but its efficiency, respect for candidates' time, and genuine care. Quality hires emerge from thoughtful assessments, not bureaucratic marathons. Lesson Learned To all recruiters, hiring managers, and employers: Quality over Quantity. Speed with Sensibility. Your brand isn't polished by dragging out interviews, it's burnished by treating people well. Rejecting applicants time and again, or preventing them from reapplying as some Australian employer do, is a red flag to candidates. If an applicant applied after being rejected by you or your recruiter, then you must assume, that once you reviewed their application initially you missed something. Instead of relying on your ATS, systems you should review their application manually and read it well. The chances are that they are actually the right fit but your ATS system, blinded by inbuilt buzzwords, missed their true value. Next time you're tempted by a labyrinthine process, pause. Ask yourself: "Is this about us or them?" 🚀 Feel free to share this lesson far and wide. Let's debunk the myth and build better workplaces together! If you have more stories or insights, I'm all ears. 😊

Many companies lose great talent because of their hiring process. It's simply too long, and they don't get it. In 2019 I went through one of these long hiring processes with a well-known tech company. On month 5 it still kept going. Tests. Interstate flights. Coffees with every team member. Presentations to the leadership team. It felt like I was sending a rocket to Mars. But it was a simple sales job. Then another company interviewed me and hired me in under a week. So the big tech 5 month hiring process ended. They were upset with me. "After all of this you're not going to join us?" "No." The hiring process should take no more than 2 weeks. Agree? 📌 If you want to skip the hiring process, read this: https://lnkd.in/gPw5t8DJ

Recruitment processes must be streamlined to be reasonable, effective and considerate.

This is very accurate

We’ve hired 25 people over the course of our journey so far. After many successes and a few misses, this is the hiring philosophy that helped us build an all-star team: → We don’t hire for the sake of filling positions May seem obvious, but I’ve seen countless startups hire just because they can. → Hire people who complement you For example: if you're more system-driven, look for people who are more execution-driven. → Hire slow & fire fast We’ve had this happen on two occasions when things didn't seem to be working out, and we parted ways fast. → We prioritize friends and former colleagues of our team members For example: our engineer, Sally, recommended Ethan. They’ve worked together at previous jobs, and because we knew Sally was highly skilled and a stellar team player, we were confident in Ethan as well. No hiring system is perfect but it's safe to say this one is working pretty well for us.