The Dilemma of Recruitment

As you've noticed I've been having my private writer's strike and not posting anything here for almost a week - a crime punishable by law in the blogosphere. This inactivity is partially due to tons of work, (for some reason January is always a nightmare!) and due to the process of recruitment I'm doing at the moment. And no, this is not going to be a post where I deplore the lack of intelligent candidates or anything like that - it's more the opposite; the dilemma offered by some great candidates and the crafting of a role where people can make the most use of their skills and abilities.

This is the heart of successful recruitment as I see it:

• A clear and honest understanding of the requirements of the role - not just skills and background required, but also what kind of person (personality, preferred way of working etc.) is most likely to succeed given the demands of the job.
• A balanced and diverse enough process for recruitment to enable a holistic view of each individual, to not only ascertain what s/he can do, but also what s/he is motivated/likes doing. Thinking being that even if you are great at doing something you don't enjoy, you still won't do it very well. Also, interviews that only take into account say your CV and a verbal discussion, take into account half or 1/3 of the reality, the challenge is to find out the other pieces of the pie. Moreover, some people are great at talking about themselves, others are not and if there aren't any other tools at your disposal to balance the view, you will be stuck.
  
• A fair and honest matching of requirements of the role with a clear understanding of the person and their strengths It is not about luring a highly competent person in to do a job which requires only 2/3's of their skills and trying to pay them as little as possible. It's about recognising the knowledge and skills that people already have and crafting a role where they can not only operate from a position of strength, but also with wide enough horizons to explore and to grow into. There is nothing more depressing than making people jump through hoops and hoops and then locking them into such a tight box that they will never grow beyond it or there isn't scope for them to do that. That's like having a door slammed in your face already at the first day of work.

So to do all this, requires nothing short of hard work. Being utterly frank about the pro's and con's of the role - also recognising that there are people out there who would be great to have on-board, but to have them locked in only performing to half of their potential is not fair on them nor is it good for you either, you just create a source of frustration, not of positive contribution. So I'm in the process of narrowing down on the person with not only the greatest growth-potential, but also the one most naturally capable of performing in the demands of the job, with an innate curiosity to learn and ability to bridge the unlikely bedfellows of research and design.

So there we are - I'd rather do my recruitment well than do it half-hearted and pay for the consequences later and first and foremost I want to create something with not only a lasting impact on the organisation, but a situation where a person who joins me will have a chance to grow and to really make a difference. That takes time, but rather take the time upfront than waste time later.