Widening gap between the glossy CV and actual skillset
22 seconds to skim a CV before tossing it into one of the three piles: Yes, No, or Maybe.
20% make it to the next round. Candidates claim they have what it takes to do the job, and I’m pleased to be able to choose from a large pool of qualified candidates.
They are invited to conduct a case study to test their basic commercial acumen and analytical capabilities. 4 out of 5 return empty spreadsheets. One of them haven’t finished reading 250 word instructions the entire hour has lapsed. The highest scorer gets 2.5 out of 5. The ones invited to case interview can’t tell me 20% of 30 billion.
Time to recalibrate expectations. It’s not a large pool after all. People are overstating their qualifications and capabilities. Or perhaps, educational institutions are pumping out less qualified work force. Or, have the applicants gotten better at crafting their CVs and cover letters? Whatever the cause, they do not what it takes to get the job done.
Hiring managers must understand the make-up of an ideal candidate before shortlisting: What must she/he an expert of, what shortcomings are acceptable, and bare minimum criteria. As a generalist, I need in-source key skillset out of my reach. I may not have time to upskill. Most likely, I am unqualified in this domain, and that’s why I am hiring!
Hiring the wrong person is worse than losing the vacancy especially in countries with tight labour laws. That’s why I rely on case studies to gauge demonstrated capability and candidate’s ability to apply logic. If the case study looks promising, I invite them to interview. During the behavioural panel interview, I create a stressful environment to measure their ability to cope with stress, remain composed as well as test their social and communication skills.
Is it too high of a bar? One recruiting agent told me so. But we’re trying to run a business here, and we must all earn our keep.