Comments on: How Do You Hire Better and Smarter?

By: Strategy for startups: 5 tips for building a performance culture « Medicine to McKinsey to Main St

Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:47:49 +0000

[...] How Do You Hire Better and Smarter? [...]

By: Grand Effect Round-up - eXtra For Every Publisher

Grand Effect Round-up - eXtra For Every Publisher — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 23:58:21 +0000

[...] but certainly not least is Mark Evans’ blog where he talks about hiring the right people, something that more and more blogs are trying to [...]

By: E Guy

E Guy — Fri, 30 May 2008 23:47:33 +0000

With the exception of the founder, I would argue that if the role does not exist in 18 months or you need a completely different person, then you are not building the company properly. Having been a part of multiple highly successful startups, roles evolve and shift but the fundamentals of the person hired into them remain and one needs to hire for 18 months down the road with the capability to do what is required at the early stage hire timeframe.

By: Larry Borsato

Larry Borsato — Fri, 30 May 2008 21:38:32 +0000

E Guy, that may be true for a company at a different stage of growth, but I’m talking about early stage companies. The role you need filled today will likely not exist in 18 months, or you will probably want a completely different person in it.

By: E Guy

E Guy — Fri, 30 May 2008 19:47:22 +0000

Larry raises an interesting point…and one often overlooked although my take on it is a little different.

In a high growth environment, companies should hire at a capability level that is some multiple higher than the actual job (many say two levels). The rationale being that within 18 months, the person will fit nicely into that job given the growth pattern of the organization. If not, then as the company grows, the person for that role is overwhelmed very quickly and another hire is required or the existing hire needs to be replaced.

In other words, hire for what you think the role will be in 18 months not what is required today.

By: Larry Borsato

Larry Borsato — Fri, 30 May 2008 19:12:03 +0000

The traditional hiring process, especially at small companies, ignores the fact that a company’s needs will change drastically over time.

I’m an early-stage startup guy; I can do absolutely everything from writing code, to marketing, to sales, but I’m best at it, and only want to work there, for a year or two.

By then the company can ramp up the second phase - a development group, marketing team, and sales team.

Needs change as the company grows and changes. Yet companies fail to realize that and hire the people they think they will want when they are a big company.

So people like me go underutilized.

By: Paul Marshall

Paul Marshall — Fri, 30 May 2008 17:55:44 +0000

This is a great topic with lots of opininions and not a lot of hard data. No hire is absolutely better than a bad hire complete agreement.
1. It is absolutely critical that you have really thought through EXACTLY what you are looking for. Be thorough and detailed. Skills, experiences, attitudes, values, business culture, etc.
2. Once you have this, networking is important, especially at a senior level. Leveraging your contacts to find someone who knows someone who know the candidate and can give you the real goods on their performance is a great data point to have.
3. Be prepared to spend lots of time with them in different settings. Have an interview, meet them out for drinks, meet them with your team, have others meet them. Spend time to draw out all the character and personality and “fit” pices that are absolutely critical in your ideal candidate.
4. Try to assess “attitude”. A generally positive disposition and approach to work and life spills over within the organization. Negativity can be a cancer.

Like I said lots of differing opinions….these are just mine.

By: Chris Clarke

Chris Clarke — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:56:11 +0000

I find the entire process ridiculous, to be honest. What do the vast majority of companies do when they need to hire someone? They post a job and hope that qualified, talented people see it and apply. That’s probably how about 95% or more companies hire people, and I think it’s a complete crap shoot. Most companies will talk about how important their people are, but when it comes time to find great people to do their jobs, they have to hope for great people to apply. I personally think that even though they’re flawed in many respects, headhunters and job placement agencies can be worthwhile investments.

And that’s just posting a job. Don’t even get me started on the traditional job interview process.

By: Derek Hatchard

Derek Hatchard — Fri, 30 May 2008 15:55:28 +0000

I like to keep candidates in an interview long enough for their “act” to wear out. I try to get them past Q&A into a conversation in which they start to express their passions, frustrations, and preferences. I also get them to spend some time with a few team members just to chat. Anyone can veto the hire based on a gut feeling. I strongly believe in the adage that no hire is better than a bad hire.

To date this has worked pretty well for me although I haven’t had to hire a lot of people fast. I’m sure it’s not a completely scalable approach but it really hasn’t failed me yet (although it can be time consuming).

For technical positions I normally give the candidate a simple exercise (e.g., for programmers: write an algorithm to sort an array). I leave the person alone with a whiteboard to work quietly and he/she can take as much time as needed. And most importantly, I get the candidate to walk me through the solution so I know he/she can decently express technical details.

Careerious looks interesting although I would worry about people answering questions about the employee they want to be, not the worker they really are. It would be very interesting to have references answer questions on behalf of candidates.

By: Mark Evans

Mark Evans — Fri, 30 May 2008 13:47:42 +0000

E Guy: Other considerations beyond skill set also include whether the person being considered is a good cultural fit, and how their personal work style fits into the scheme of things. All of which makes hiring even more complex.