The hiring paradox

We must admit that no matter how well-organized and polished our hiring processes are, our gut feeling ultimately takes the lead.

Let's see a typical hiring process in the tech field:

• a meticulous CV scan + huge appreciation for well-written Cover Letters
• an intro call + huge appreciation if the candidates have deep knowledge about our organization by studying the firm's website, manifesto, social channels, etc
• an assignment + huge appreciation if the candidates took the extra mile and polished their solution as much as possible. Engineers, for example, can provide test cases with Cucumber or even write some integration tests and fine-tune the CI/CD platform to prove there is deep knowledge and end-to-end perception
• an extended call + huge appreciation of soft skills primarily by inviting some extra non-biased people apart from the hiring manager to attend this event to provide feedback for the cultural fit
• background check + huge appreciation if there are 2-3 references
• a meeting with an upper-level executive
• an offer follows

So, how exactly do we justify that these candidates match our culture and our team's DNA?

One could say that signs are everywhere, so we must pay attention to every detail throughout the process, correct?

Are you sure we know enough to hire or reject someone after 2-3 meetings or video calls?

I am sure we know enough to lean towards a direction, but can we really put our hand in the fire? We cannot.

Personally, I've seen that both parties try to oversell themselves as much as possible during the hiring process. It is inevitable since both sides want to show off and look attractive.

Do you think we can avoid this? Of course not. It is a natural reaction, as if we are flirting in a weird, professional way during these sessions.

That said, we need to acknowledge that no matter how well-polished and thoughtful our hiring process is, the results do not follow a scientific formula that delivers results with 100% accuracy. It does not. The match is in theory.

OK, what must we improve to build a great team then? Our evaluation processes, of course. This is where results can be much more precise and accurate.

Hiring involves lots of guessing; on the other hand, evaluating is knowing. We know whether a person is a cultural fit or a brilliant jerk. We don't assume anything. It is factual.

Okay then, so should we make sloppy and fast hirings? Not exactly, but we need to acknowledge that hiring doesn't end after the offer.

The solution to forming a great team starts with hiring and continues with evaluating.

If this relationship doesn't work out in practice, we need to move on in a professional and structured way.

The offboarding period is critical and affects our team's morale, but we rarely discuss it, even though it is the final stop of an employee's journey in our firm.

This is where our firm's culture lies, though. Cheers!!