But... that seems a bit of a wrong approach. If it takes you another 6 weeks to fill the role, that's 6 weeks someone could have been "learning on the job", no? And there's always a ramp up period - you're making an assumption that the person coming in without X years experience in tech Y will by definition not be able to learn fast enough on the job to be productive enough to hit target Z. But by not filling that role, you're definitely not hitting target Z. I do also get that there's time that's spent in onboarding any new hire, but that's possibly equivalent to spending more time hiring no?
I understand your main point, but I just think many companies hold fast to that position far too long, when the alternatives might be better than they think.
I understand your main point, but I just think many companies hold fast to that position far too long, when the alternatives might be better than they think.