<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: hiring as a core competency</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 17:52:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: sethlevine</title>
		<link>http://www.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency/comment-page-1#comment-19369</link>
		<dc:creator>sethlevine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:51:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency#comment-19369</guid>
		<description>i  strongly agree on this point. weâve used the âtry before you buyâ idea very  successfully at many companies to great success.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i  strongly agree on this point. weâve used the âtry before you buyâ idea very  successfully at many companies to great success.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sethlevine</title>
		<link>http://www.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency/comment-page-1#comment-19360</link>
		<dc:creator>sethlevine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:51:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency#comment-19360</guid>
		<description>i  disagree with you on reference checking. finding âoff deckâ (meaning references  that the candidate didnât provide) can be a very helpful way of understanding whether  youâve got someone who will work in your organization or not. the challenge is  asking the right questions in the right way (and of course itâs helpful if you  have a relationship of some kind with the person youâre talking to â even if  just from a friendly introduction â so you are more likely to be getting meaningful  feedback).Â  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i  disagree with you on reference checking. finding âoff deckâ (meaning references  that the candidate didnât provide) can be a very helpful way of understanding whether  youâve got someone who will work in your organization or not. the challenge is  asking the right questions in the right way (and of course itâs helpful if you  have a relationship of some kind with the person youâre talking to â even if  just from a friendly introduction â so you are more likely to be getting meaningful  feedback).Â  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sethlevine</title>
		<link>http://www.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency/comment-page-1#comment-19368</link>
		<dc:creator>sethlevine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:51:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency#comment-19368</guid>
		<description>i  strongly agree on this point. weâve used the âtry before you buyâ idea very  successfully at many companies to great success.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i  strongly agree on this point. weâve used the âtry before you buyâ idea very  successfully at many companies to great success.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sethlevine</title>
		<link>http://www.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency/comment-page-1#comment-19359</link>
		<dc:creator>sethlevine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 18:51:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency#comment-19359</guid>
		<description>i  disagree with you on reference checking. finding âoff deckâ (meaning references  that the candidate didnât provide) can be a very helpful way of understanding whether  youâve got someone who will work in your organization or not. the challenge is  asking the right questions in the right way (and of course itâs helpful if you  have a relationship of some kind with the person youâre talking to â even if  just from a friendly introduction â so you are more likely to be getting meaningful  feedback).Â  &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>i  disagree with you on reference checking. finding âoff deckâ (meaning references  that the candidate didnât provide) can be a very helpful way of understanding whether  youâve got someone who will work in your organization or not. the challenge is  asking the right questions in the right way (and of course itâs helpful if you  have a relationship of some kind with the person youâre talking to â even if  just from a friendly introduction â so you are more likely to be getting meaningful  feedback).Â  </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gpaskill</title>
		<link>http://www.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency/comment-page-1#comment-19361</link>
		<dc:creator>gpaskill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:25:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency#comment-19361</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve done this approach, the shareware model.  (Others say it&#039;s like an &quot;audition.&quot;)  It&#039;s really good to see which candidates are committed and can deliver.  Experience is overrated, especially in a world of accelerated change.

I&#039;ve also had some candidates call me aside and say, &quot;You know what, this kind of work isn&#039;t really for me after all.&quot;  Great!  We say &quot;Goodbye&quot; without hard feelings, and they&#039;ll talk favorably of my company in the corporate grapevine.

Of course, you can&#039;t have them work too much for free.  Occasionally, you&#039;ll come across the money-oriented candidate.  (Since when did talking money become taboo?)  He&#039;ll smartly say, &quot;If you want more, make me an offer!&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#039;ve done this approach, the shareware model.  (Others say it&#039;s like an &#8220;audition.&#8221;)  It&#039;s really good to see which candidates are committed and can deliver.  Experience is overrated, especially in a world of accelerated change.</p>
<p>I&#039;ve also had some candidates call me aside and say, &#8220;You know what, this kind of work isn&#039;t really for me after all.&#8221;  Great!  We say &#8220;Goodbye&#8221; without hard feelings, and they&#039;ll talk favorably of my company in the corporate grapevine.</p>
<p>Of course, you can&#039;t have them work too much for free.  Occasionally, you&#039;ll come across the money-oriented candidate.  (Since when did talking money become taboo?)  He&#039;ll smartly say, &#8220;If you want more, make me an offer!&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gpaskill</title>
		<link>http://www.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency/comment-page-1#comment-19348</link>
		<dc:creator>gpaskill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 22:09:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency#comment-19348</guid>
		<description>While it makes sense &quot;to delay a product/release/market launch to find the right person for the job,&quot; we must guard against perfectionism becoming procrastination.

Hiring has deteriorated lately .  Its main question is,  &quot;How do we avoid hiring mistakes?&quot;

Yes, get great people.  Yet too many hiring managers, HR, and inteviewers find minor flaws in candidates then bellow, &quot;Nobody is qualified!&quot;  Sorry, it&#039;s also a hiring mistake to let right candidates get away.

You&#039;ve got one smart way of fixing this mess.  &quot;Try before you buy&quot; is great!  Hiring needs to be less about &quot;what you have done&quot; and more on &quot;what you can do.&quot;  (If you are a startup, aren&#039;t you all about defining the future?  Why do my fellow Valley managers request resumes, devices that only talk about the past?)

Intererested people don&#039;t want to talk what they did for others, they want to show what they can do for you.  That separates competents from wannabees.  That also sorts employers who know business from those who don&#039;t have their act together.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While it makes sense &#8220;to delay a product/release/market launch to find the right person for the job,&#8221; we must guard against perfectionism becoming procrastination.</p>
<p>Hiring has deteriorated lately .  Its main question is,  &#8220;How do we avoid hiring mistakes?&#8221;</p>
<p>Yes, get great people.  Yet too many hiring managers, HR, and inteviewers find minor flaws in candidates then bellow, &#8220;Nobody is qualified!&#8221;  Sorry, it&#039;s also a hiring mistake to let right candidates get away.</p>
<p>You&#039;ve got one smart way of fixing this mess.  &#8220;Try before you buy&#8221; is great!  Hiring needs to be less about &#8220;what you have done&#8221; and more on &#8220;what you can do.&#8221;  (If you are a startup, aren&#039;t you all about defining the future?  Why do my fellow Valley managers request resumes, devices that only talk about the past?)</p>
<p>Intererested people don&#039;t want to talk what they did for others, they want to show what they can do for you.  That separates competents from wannabees.  That also sorts employers who know business from those who don&#039;t have their act together.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: gpaskill</title>
		<link>http://www.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency/comment-page-1#comment-19358</link>
		<dc:creator>gpaskill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:50:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency#comment-19358</guid>
		<description>If it weren&#039;t for the perils of negligent hiring, I&#039;d pass a law to abolish reference checking.

Going beyond references a candidate supplied can be tricky.   Some have a hard time talking about someone to begin with.  To appear more real they invent fake flaws.  Another reference a degree away can sound unprepared and lost.  As more candidates know this is in play, they&#039;ll tell their references what names to supply if asked.

I had some cases where even though references didn&#039;t sound favorable, I went with the hire anyway.  Their past environments didn&#039;t let them develop those stellar 1st and 2nd level references.

American management suffers tremendously from lack of leadership.  Pushing off hiring decisions through devices like a reference of a reference and hiring-by-committee means the manager is held less accountable.

Job hunting tips abound on the Net, and as an employer it sickens me to see how many games appear on both candidate and employer side.  So sad neither focuses on the work and developing a relationship based on mutual respect.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If it weren&#039;t for the perils of negligent hiring, I&#039;d pass a law to abolish reference checking.</p>
<p>Going beyond references a candidate supplied can be tricky.   Some have a hard time talking about someone to begin with.  To appear more real they invent fake flaws.  Another reference a degree away can sound unprepared and lost.  As more candidates know this is in play, they&#039;ll tell their references what names to supply if asked.</p>
<p>I had some cases where even though references didn&#039;t sound favorable, I went with the hire anyway.  Their past environments didn&#039;t let them develop those stellar 1st and 2nd level references.</p>
<p>American management suffers tremendously from lack of leadership.  Pushing off hiring decisions through devices like a reference of a reference and hiring-by-committee means the manager is held less accountable.</p>
<p>Job hunting tips abound on the Net, and as an employer it sickens me to see how many games appear on both candidate and employer side.  So sad neither focuses on the work and developing a relationship based on mutual respect.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sethlevine</title>
		<link>http://www.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency/comment-page-1#comment-19336</link>
		<dc:creator>sethlevine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2009 02:27:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency#comment-19336</guid>
		<description>My wise old friend Harry Levinson once told me that organizations are attack vehicles.  Thinking about that comment, I realized that companies attack their markets and competitors, the Red Cross attacks natural disasters, youth soccer leagues attack lethargy and isolation in children, hospitals attack diseases, and health insurers attack our bank accounts.  The list goes on.  My experience long ago in the 3rd Infantry Division ( a literal attack organization) taught me that I did not want a squad of slumbering privates protecting my flank.  It was also important to pay attention to how the whole platoon prepared to coordinate;  in that metaphor, the machine-gunners had to coordinate their sectors of fire properly so that - when all hell broke loose - they had locked their weapons transversal arcs properly -- if the handlers jerked wildly in the chaos, they did not end up swinging around and shooting down buddies on the line in-between.  Sounds really simple, huh?  Fact is, people make all kinds of allowances in hiring other people. They often don&#039;t act as though the choices they make in hiring can have dire consequences.  We hire people because we have a problem that needs to be solved.  Quickly!  We are pressured to act expediently.  The problem we have at the moment is:  we need someone to solve a problem.  We hire someone to discharge the tension we feel about our hiring problem, rather than for the ultimate purpose of solving the real subject problem -- we don&#039;t &quot;fire for effect.&quot; Someone comes along and talks a good talk.  Our HR people ask them targeted interviewing questions (e.g., Q: &quot;Courage is important in this job.  Can you tell me about a time that you were courageous?&quot;  A: &quot;Walking home from work yesterday, I witnessed a muscular mugger beating up a child, so I decked the gorilla and rescued the child.&quot;). Other than reference checking (in this lawsuit-avoidant environment?),  there&#039;s no check for fabrication.  Bingo!  Hero gets the job!  And we feel better because we&#039;ve solved our ersatz  &quot;hiring problem.&quot;   Maybe creating a later firing problem?  Why not see if the person can DEMONSTRATE courage right there in front of you?  And then see how he/she coordinates with others expected to interact with him/her?  I&#039;m not advocating playing head games with the candidate.  You&#039;re actually being fair to the candidates by giving them an opportunity to show you what they can do., not just talk about it.  To elaborate on your &quot;try before you buy&quot; point - if you have a problem that the person you&#039;re hiring is supposed to solve, put that problem - or something like it - directly in front of them, and see how they attack it.  Also find a way to put the candidate together with other people who are engaged with the problem, and see what value the candidate adds. Not just to the solution, but to the team&#039;s thinking about the solution; because there will be other problems that team has to solve.  Do it again and again in different iterations.  The best predictor of future performance is not past performance, it&#039;s current performance!  Why just talk about hypotheticals (&quot;How would you approach or solve this kind of problem?&quot;), if you can give the candidates the chance to get on the line, in relatively safe pre-hiring circumstances, and show how they attack problems that could potentially put your company in the ground?  Incidentally, my problem, at this moment, seems to be verbosity.  Bernie Daina, Organizational Psychologist</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My wise old friend Harry Levinson once told me that organizations are attack vehicles.  Thinking about that comment, I realized that companies attack their markets and competitors, the Red Cross attacks natural disasters, youth soccer leagues attack lethargy and isolation in children, hospitals attack diseases, and health insurers attack our bank accounts.  The list goes on.  My experience long ago in the 3rd Infantry Division ( a literal attack organization) taught me that I did not want a squad of slumbering privates protecting my flank.  It was also important to pay attention to how the whole platoon prepared to coordinate;  in that metaphor, the machine-gunners had to coordinate their sectors of fire properly so that &#8211; when all hell broke loose &#8211; they had locked their weapons transversal arcs properly &#8212; if the handlers jerked wildly in the chaos, they did not end up swinging around and shooting down buddies on the line in-between.  Sounds really simple, huh?  Fact is, people make all kinds of allowances in hiring other people. They often don&#039;t act as though the choices they make in hiring can have dire consequences.  We hire people because we have a problem that needs to be solved.  Quickly!  We are pressured to act expediently.  The problem we have at the moment is:  we need someone to solve a problem.  We hire someone to discharge the tension we feel about our hiring problem, rather than for the ultimate purpose of solving the real subject problem &#8212; we don&#039;t &#8220;fire for effect.&#8221; Someone comes along and talks a good talk.  Our HR people ask them targeted interviewing questions (e.g., Q: &#8220;Courage is important in this job.  Can you tell me about a time that you were courageous?&#8221;  A: &#8220;Walking home from work yesterday, I witnessed a muscular mugger beating up a child, so I decked the gorilla and rescued the child.&#8221;). Other than reference checking (in this lawsuit-avoidant environment?),  there&#039;s no check for fabrication.  Bingo!  Hero gets the job!  And we feel better because we&#039;ve solved our ersatz  &#8220;hiring problem.&#8221;   Maybe creating a later firing problem?  Why not see if the person can DEMONSTRATE courage right there in front of you?  And then see how he/she coordinates with others expected to interact with him/her?  I&#039;m not advocating playing head games with the candidate.  You&#039;re actually being fair to the candidates by giving them an opportunity to show you what they can do., not just talk about it.  To elaborate on your &#8220;try before you buy&#8221; point &#8211; if you have a problem that the person you&#039;re hiring is supposed to solve, put that problem &#8211; or something like it &#8211; directly in front of them, and see how they attack it.  Also find a way to put the candidate together with other people who are engaged with the problem, and see what value the candidate adds. Not just to the solution, but to the team&#039;s thinking about the solution; because there will be other problems that team has to solve.  Do it again and again in different iterations.  The best predictor of future performance is not past performance, it&#039;s current performance!  Why just talk about hypotheticals (&#8220;How would you approach or solve this kind of problem?&#8221;), if you can give the candidates the chance to get on the line, in relatively safe pre-hiring circumstances, and show how they attack problems that could potentially put your company in the ground?  Incidentally, my problem, at this moment, seems to be verbosity.  Bernie Daina, Organizational Psychologist</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: sethlevine</title>
		<link>http://www.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency/comment-page-1#comment-19367</link>
		<dc:creator>sethlevine</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 21:36:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency#comment-19367</guid>
		<description>thanks  for the comment. i do think stage and pace of growth effect your âfail rateâ  pretty significantly.Â  when youâre hiring a relatively few number of people â  and particularly if youâre doing trial runs with them in a meaningful way â  your failure rate should be pretty close to zero (think the first 10-15 people  in a company).Â  as you start to get bigger, as you start to hire a little  faster iâd guess that we see about 10% to maybe 15% failure in hires. there are  two keys here â one of course is to simply try to keep the figure as low as  possible. the other is to make sure that when you do make a mistake you figure  it out in the first 30 days and take action rather than let people hang on (or  simply not pay enough attention to know if someone is working out).&lt;br /&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>thanks  for the comment. i do think stage and pace of growth effect your âfail rateâ  pretty significantly.Â  when youâre hiring a relatively few number of people â  and particularly if youâre doing trial runs with them in a meaningful way â  your failure rate should be pretty close to zero (think the first 10-15 people  in a company).Â  as you start to get bigger, as you start to hire a little  faster iâd guess that we see about 10% to maybe 15% failure in hires. there are  two keys here â one of course is to simply try to keep the figure as low as  possible. the other is to make sure that when you do make a mistake you figure  it out in the first 30 days and take action rather than let people hang on (or  simply not pay enough attention to know if someone is working out).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tones</title>
		<link>http://www.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency/comment-page-1#comment-19347</link>
		<dc:creator>tones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Feb 2009 19:39:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://new.sethlevine.com/wp/2009/01/hiring-as-a-core-competency#comment-19347</guid>
		<description>Just curious about the &quot;slow to hire, quick to fire&quot; adage especially for startups and want to get some benchmarks...what is a &quot;normal&quot; or &quot;healthy&quot; turnover rate for employees and new hires in a startup company?  To give you an example, I work in a startup that currently has about 11 full-time employees and in the last year, we&#039;ve hired &amp; fired about 6 people.  Not sure if the type or stage of the startup makes any difference, but I&#039;d like to know what other startups are seeing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just curious about the &#8220;slow to hire, quick to fire&#8221; adage especially for startups and want to get some benchmarks&#8230;what is a &#8220;normal&#8221; or &#8220;healthy&#8221; turnover rate for employees and new hires in a startup company?  To give you an example, I work in a startup that currently has about 11 full-time employees and in the last year, we&#039;ve hired &#038; fired about 6 people.  Not sure if the type or stage of the startup makes any difference, but I&#039;d like to know what other startups are seeing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

