

Ask HN: Disrupt – Recruiting - nns

I wanted to start a periodic series of brainstorming where we could write down our ideas and views on existing practices of one particular industry which may (or may not) be ripe for Disruption. We could focus on emerging trends and pain points that this community of Technologists can adopt and solve for.<p>As a start, I wanted to open the conversation on a topic whose current state of play we all find difficult to accept and cope with - Recruiting.<p>Some questions that I could think of:<p>* What trends are you seeing that you think should be more widely adopted?
* What practices could promote a better dialogue between recruiters and candidates?
* How can we solve for some of these problems using the technology we have at hand?
* .....<p>For mutual benefit, lets keep this conversation as constructive as possible. Lets keep the criticism limited to the extent it can be converted to positive motivation for change.
======
MalcolmDiggs
I like the spirit of this thread. Kudos.

 _What trends are you seeing that you think should be more widely adopted?_

Recruiters that behave more like community-managers / outreach-coordinators.
Roles whose purpose is to engage with (and build relationships with) the
developer-community as a whole, not just pluck talent ad-hoc.

 _What practices could promote a better dialogue between recruiters and
candidates?_

I find it easier to engage with a recruiter (instead of circumventing them)
when they personally offer me something of value. For example: The recruiter
who says "if you apply online you'll just get a phone interview, but if you go
through me I'll get you a 1-on-1 lunch with the CTO". When they start off with
a clear value-proposition like that, then the headaches and bureaucracy of
dealing with them are much easier to stomach.

 _How can we solve for some of these problems using the technology we have at
hand?_

I wish the application process could be a bit more standardized for the early
stages (like the college / grad-school admissions process). I think it'd be an
interesting thought-experiment to envision a standard-format for application
packages. Imagine a package.json ~esque file that pulled in your github repos,
recommendations, personal statements, etc. I wonder what else would be
necessary.

It seems like the beginning stages of working with a recruiter are always the
same ("where'd you go to school?", "show me some stuff you've done", "have you
heard of Big O notation?", etc etc). I wish we could just put together one
standard packet, throw it up somewhere online, and let the recruiters line up
interviews for us. If that would allow the recruiters to contact us with an
"I've got you an interview" type of message instead of a "hey let's talk"
message, I'd be all for it.

------
JSeymourATL
This post reminded me of a recent Nick Corcodilos article:

The reason the labor market seems less efficient is because applicant tracking
systems (ATS) and job boards fail to match job applicants to jobs, and
instead, stimulate phony recruiting activity by human resources (HR)
departments. The employment system is now clogged with so much crud spawned by
these databases that even Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen is confused.
ATS databases like LinkedIn and Oracle’s Taleo — these darlings of the stock
market — are making it more difficult for employers to hire.
[http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/ask-headhunter-
recr...](http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/ask-headhunter-recruiting-
technology-costs-job/)

One piece of technology-- often overlooked, good old-fashioned phone
conversation. Sadly, a dying art.

------
Theranos
As a recruiter, I would be very interested to hear what engineers have to say
here.

One thing I believe that makes a good recruiter is not only the ability to
find good talent, connecting w/ people who have the right experience but also
to remember this is a human experience.

I transitioned from QA engineering into recruiting because a) I was tired of
QA and couldn't code to save my life and b) because a lot of the recruiters
who reached out to me where just horrible and just treated me as a number -
not even know what I did - and not even caring.

What I discovered upon transitioning is how frantic it can be. I'm going to
use a 3 round process for this example - To get 1 engineering hire, recruiters
could need to have 2-4 candidates make it to final round, which means
realistically there should be 6-12 onsite interviews, which means 18-35+ phone
screens, which means a recruiter would have to have to 50-100+ engineers
willing to talk to them w/ regards to the role. Meaning they'd have to reach
out to 150-300+ engineers. Obviously I'm picking an arbitrary 3x multiplier as
some recruiters are better than others and may not need to reach out to that
many, or some might even need more.

If a recruiter has multiple positions they're trying to fill (which happens
all the time) that means they really don't have a lot of time to put onto each
position and less time if they need to spend time working w/ candidates
currently in process and Hiring managers.

Creating software that might help a recruiter make more accurate assessments
of candidates skill sets really only work if engineers are forthcoming and
totally accurate w/ their skill sets. However even then the best algorithms
can be fooled. Sites like Linkedin, Bright or Whitetruffle (just pulling from
the top of my head) can have poor matching because of how a
descriptions/requirements on both the candidates and the company's side are
misrepresented. The other thing to remember; software can never properly
replace "high touch" human interaction - which, at it's core is what
recruiting is often about. Thoughts?

