
Is talent the only consideration while recruiting a candidate for a job? - QueenRitchie
I&#x27;ve attended n number of interviews for SDE role and have come across too many factors like,<p>i)   Female candidate - to be highly unpreferable.
ii)  Longevity - should not opt for higher studies
iii) Should be from a moderate background
iv)  Preference to referrals or relatives<p>After seeing these many factors I really have a doubt that is &quot;talent&quot; considered the top or the only thing during recruiting a candidate?<p>If NO why? And what are the other discriminating factor you find during job interviews?
======
mneil
To be blunt, you appear to only be considering your own experience and are
assuming you're a perfect candidate for every position you've interviewed for.

If you have been applying for positions in the US first I'd point out that
your post has several grammatical errors. If you make the same in applications
it's not an immediate disqualification but it's less desirable than a similar
candidate with better writing skills.

Soft skills, communication, cultural fit, and humility are very important to
me as a person who has performed hiring for several years in different roles.
Technical skills, except for some niche areas, can be taught. Being a good
human is harder to learn on the job.

If I encountered a female candidate and a male candidate that were equal in
all aspects I'd likely take the female candidate first because, in general,
females are under represented and having more diversity helps product teams
IMO.

In short, "talent" is definitely not the top reason to hire someone outside of
highly specialized fields. At least that's how I would hire.

~~~
QueenRitchie
Great opinion mneil. Thanks a lot for sharing it.

>>assuming you're a perfect candidate for every position you've interviewed
for

I'm really sorry if it sounded that way. I agree I may not fit for the role
for which I was interviewed for. But I really wish to know whether such
factors really exists.

------
smt88
It's not clear to me what ii and iii mean. Can you explain using different
wording?

~~~
QueenRitchie
ii) The candidate must work for the organisation in long turn. iii) From a
moderate family background.

~~~
mneil
ii) definitely not true, but it doesn't hurt. Many corporations have policies
requiring internal job postings for certain lengths of time before being able
to hire someone from outside. The idea here is to promote internal, upward,
growth with the hope that most people will be hired at the bottom and "work
their way up". Smaller companies / startups tend to not have these policies
and / or are not large enough for that to work so already having a job there
doesn't necessarily benefit you.

iii) this has 0 impact in my experience. I do not know, or care, where you're
from or your personal background and nobody should ask you this and you should
not reveal it. What matters is; are you qualified? Do you have the experience
and can you show me you work well with others and know what you're doing. At
an entry position it's more about personality than skill. Although skill is
still very important.

