As a recruiter what percentage of the time are you throwing candidates at jobs to see what sticks?
Because most people do a really bad job at technical interviewing and selection - there's so much to say about why it would take a book to explain it all. BUT importantly - everyone thinks they do a great job at interviewing and selection.
>> As a recruiter what percentage of the time are you throwing candidates at jobs to see what sticks?
I'm not sure I understand the question. Is it saying "recruiters send any old person for a job in the random hope they might get it, how often do you do that?".
I don't do that.
I try to find the right person for the job, I look for people who are smart and get stuff done and I send people who I think are going to contribute something meaningful to a company. I use my technical expertise to try to understand the candidates level of technical experience, and I articulate the strengths and weaknesses of the candidate to the employer.
I have been on the receiving end of a lot of bad recruiters. I have found that my needs were ignored and anyone who could fog a mirror was thrown my way has made me somewhat cynical of recruiters. If you are doing the right thing then this is fantastic. I wish people like you weren’t so rare.
Asking because I've seen that one play out a fair few times.
Not in this case, but I definitely think you are correct, that some people don't want to hire someone who might be smarter than them and therefore be a threat to their position in the hierarchy/sense of belonging/job security.