"At SendHub we’ve let go of about half of the people we’ve hired, most of them within a few weeks of their start date. Looking back at everyone we let go much later, we should’ve terminated them during their probation."
Is it just me or is a company's hiring process fubar if they are firing half their hires within 3 weeks (and more thereafter)? I get the need for early stage startups to not let mediocrity seep in, and having a probationary period is great for that, but I'd argue the company is neglecting their end of the bargain if they are apparently so inept at bringing on the right people.
The hiring process everywhere is a disaster, as far I've seen. Interviews don't really work. If companies operated by giving people a few-week chance to prove themselves they'd be able to give more people more opportunities and have a much better idea of who was worth keeping.
But of course, with the current system if you get fired after two weeks you're looking at trying to get hired at a bunch of other companies that are going to view that as a Bad Thing and are going to try to get as much info from a few interviews before they jump into bed with you for years. We're in a bad equilibrium.
Weighing in from the "Recruiting" Startup industry myself, check out https://grouptalent.com/ (which i have nothing to do with) if you are in that hiring mentality, that way everyone knows exactly what is going on and there is a better reaction set all around.
Is it just me or is a company's hiring process fubar if they are firing half their hires within 3 weeks (and more thereafter)? I get the need for early stage startups to not let mediocrity seep in, and having a probationary period is great for that, but I'd argue the company is neglecting their end of the bargain if they are apparently so inept at bringing on the right people.