
How to Hire - jrkelly
https://medium.com/@henrysward/how-to-hire-34f4ded5f176#.w0av7pj1k
======
greenyoda
_" We should not be afraid of False Positives. We can quickly fix a False
Positive hiring decision."_

That "False Positive" that you can "quickly fix" (by firing them) is a human
being. He or she may have left a job they were reasonably happy with to join
your company, or even moved to another city. The experience of being fired
after a few weeks will cost them money and inflict emotional pain on them (and
their family, if they have one). I wouldn't want to work for a someone who had
such a careless attitude toward hiring and firing people.

~~~
makeitsuckless
Also, this callous attitude will run afoul of labour protection laws in most
civilized countries that aren't the US.

~~~
Udo
> _Also, this callous attitude will run afoul of labour protection laws in
> most civilized countries that aren 't the US._

I can only speak for Germany, but here it's normal to have a trial period
("Probezeit") for jobs, it's specifically designed for employers and employees
to find out if they can work together. Once that trial period (which can last
for months) is over, there are additional protections for the employee, but
you can still fire someone, it just costs more. It's not a bad deal (and I say
this as someone who once had to fire an employee for what I would call
malicious incompetence: we still had to pay severance, but after that both
parties went on their merry way).

------
makeitsuckless
"Hire Doers vs Tellers". I agree with the statement, but I disagree with the
method.

You can separate doers from tellers by _how_ they talk about the work and how
they (non-verbally) react to certain questions. However, separating them by
creating a totally artificial and unrealistic "doing" situation, be it via
role playing or coding tests, will result in a lot of false negatives.

~~~
danbolt
Your distinction is interesting. If you could elaborate on what separates
doers/tellers, I'd be interested in hearing.

------
msoad
"Fire fast" is the horrible advice that has made Netflix and companies with
similar policies a very stressful place to work at.

What if someone who is amazing at their job is going through a divorce and
underperforming? Would you fire the "not doer"? There is no way for you to
know what's going on in one's personal life and that can impact their
performance heavily.

If your tolerance is just a few weeks to fire someone it's just immoral.

~~~
vonmoltke
> If your tolerance is just a few weeks to fire someone it's just immoral.

>> For those of you questioning the morality of fast iteration of new hires
please consider the alternative: we deny people opportunity for fear they
won’t succeed or we keep people in roles where they won’t be successful. This
creates walls around (and within) organizations. Let’s welcome those who want
to join us. Let’s give them as much as opportunity as we can. And let’s
quickly tell them if they will have more opportunity elsewhere. As long as we
do it helpfully and respectfully (which we always will), helping people sort
themselves into and out of eShares is good for all involved.

The author had that covered. It is not calling for simply throwing people out
like the trash because they underperform for a few weeks.

------
Jemaclus
I really enjoyed this post, partly because I agree with almost everything. The
section that jumped out the most for me is the "Hiring for Strength vs Lack of
Weakness." The author is absolutely correct. Hiring is not (and should not be)
a democracy. It's the decision of the _hiring manager_. Everyone else's job is
to provide quality feedback so that the hiring manager can make that decision
effectively. As a side note, the hiring manager's _other_ role here is to
cultivate actionable feedback from her interviewing team. The better her team
gets at interviewing and identifying strengths, the easier her decision gets.

