Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

You Only Need 50% of Job “Requirements”

talent.works

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 254 posts

Re: You Only Need 50% of Job “Requirements”

#111

Post by techstrategist »

mbesto wrote: post #109
rossdavidh wrote: post #68

I think many people write their job description's requirements, as if it were the opening stage of a negotiation. You list everything you want as if it were a requirement, and you will only get about half of that. But the problem is, it isn't a negotiation, it's a minimum spec (especially if you put the word "required" next to that line), and so many quite good candidates won't apply. However, typically, I see 20-30…

> I think many people write their job description's requirements, as if it were the opening stage of a negotiation. As someone who has written and hired technical talent - this is absolutely true. > so many quite good candidates won't apply. I agree with your sentiment but generally disagree in practice. The reality is I get 100's of applications that are nowhere near qualified for positions I've listed. We're talkin…

Having many unqualified applicants is unrelated to how many good 50-75% candidates self-select against applying. It’s likely entirely different groups exhibiting the inverse effects of Dunning-Kruger.

Re: You Only Need 50% of Job “Requirements”

#112

Post by duxup »

24gttghh wrote: post #53
carlmr wrote: post #47

I've only once ticked of roughly 95% of job requirements. I didn't get the job. They actually cited the 1/20 requirements I didn't fulfill and said they can't hire anybody who doesn't have that. They wanted a 100% candidate. Looking through the list of the things they listed as must haves and that they wanted an internal candidate I showed them it is statistically very unlikely they would even find a better candidate…

>The position had been open for almost a year. I think there's a reason. Fake job openings to keep HR people busy?

Do they still require you look locally and "not find" someone before you go H1B?

Re: You Only Need 50% of Job “Requirements”

#113

Post by sethammons »

austincheney wrote: post #103
sethammons wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ok, and? We've also seen "how many pingpong balls can fill a school bus" from the likes of Google. They eventually learned it was not a good filter. If a personality test truly is better, I want to know because I'm involved with hiring at my company. What qualifies Bridgewater's take on this? How have they leveraged it and to what effect? Correlation, causation, all that jazz too - if I want to be taller, I should ob…

> If a personality test truly is better, I want to know because I'm involved with hiring at my company. Then I recommend getting in contact with a behavioral health professional. > What qualifies Bridgewater's take on this? Their success and retention. When I went through the Bridgewater process there were about 6 different personally tests I took. Some were more precise than others. I measured a 96% objectivity scor…

There are companies with practically zero attrition rates and are successful; lots of companies can claim what you are claiming. Again, what you are saying is the same as "if I want to be taller, I should play basketball."

Re: You Only Need 50% of Job “Requirements”

#114

Post by mbesto »

techstrategist wrote: post #111
mbesto wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think many people write their job description's requirements, as if it were the opening stage of a negotiation. As someone who has written and hired technical talent - this is absolutely true. > so many quite good candidates won't apply. I agree with your sentiment but generally disagree in practice. The reality is I get 100's of applications that are nowhere near qualified for positions I've listed. We're talkin…

Having many unqualified applicants is unrelated to how many good 50-75% candidates self-select against applying. It’s likely entirely different groups exhibiting the inverse effects of Dunning-Kruger.

> how many good 50-75% candidates self-select against applying

Got some data to back that up?

Re: You Only Need 50% of Job “Requirements”

#115

Post by refurb »

jkestner wrote: post #99
AnaniasAnanas wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> since we need female candidates May I ask why? Why does it matter if the candidate is male or female? Why not just hire the most fit candidates regardless of their gender and be done with it?

Because that's how you get Apple Health omitting a monthly bodily function that a majority of the population has. Diversity of perspective makes a better product.

Is that really the reason why Apple Health didn't include menstrual cycle tracking? Or did they just decide not to add it in additional to a bunch of other things?

Re: You Only Need 50% of Job “Requirements”

#116

Post by sheeshkebab »

yardie wrote: post #76
kamarg wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems to me that this was a job put together with a specific person in mind and somehow that didn't work out and they just didn't know what to do after that. Seen this same scenario play out before at multiple companies.

This is most likely the reason. One of the requirements for an H2B visa is that an in-country hire isn't possible. And you make that impossible by asking for impossible requirements. You may have seen these as experience requirements in 5+ years technology that has only existed for 2-3 years.

I think h1b doesn’t have such requirement - only that the wage is in prevailing range...

applying to employer sponsors green card though does require proof of lack of local hires, and job reqs that are created to prove this often go to this crazy level and have to be met 100%.

Re: You Only Need 50% of Job “Requirements”

#117

Post by carlmr »

rejschaap wrote: post #108
carlmr wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I only showed them after they already told me it's a no. I didn't really have a reason to be polite after that. I was just a bit incredulous. The job posting is still open now 1 year later, although they refreshed the date.

You should always be polite, you might meet them again in a different time and place. It sounds like this rejection bothers you a lot. You are in danger of not seeing the bigger picture because you are hung up on not meeting that single requirement.

It doesn't bother me that I didn't get the job that much. Just the headline of this thread reminded me of it. I already had a comfortable position and I have a new position now in a great team. I think it worked out for the best.

The only way in which this bothers me is that these (I assume) fake, unfilled jobs are used for political reasons. But that's a global problem.

Re: You Only Need 50% of Job “Requirements”

#118

Post by gamblor956 »

rhacker wrote: post #90
carlmr wrote: post #47

I've only once ticked of roughly 95% of job requirements. I didn't get the job. They actually cited the 1/20 requirements I didn't fulfill and said they can't hire anybody who doesn't have that. They wanted a 100% candidate. Looking through the list of the things they listed as must haves and that they wanted an internal candidate I showed them it is statistically very unlikely they would even find a better candidate…

It's one thing for engineers to "be the HR department" at small companies. They are willing to let things slide because they know the candidate, especially after interviewing them, that they can fill in the knowledge gaps (well I don't know about the willing to move to china bit). Contrast that with a large company with a specific HR department that is in charge of taking a job requirement sheet and finding and filte…

At my company if a candidate doesn't check all the reqs but comes close, HR shows the resume to the relevant department and asks them how important the missing boxes are. We're willing to train employees, so we usually at least give the candidate an interview.

Re: You Only Need 50% of Job “Requirements”

#119

Post by [deleted] »

rejschaap wrote: post #108
carlmr wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I only showed them after they already told me it's a no. I didn't really have a reason to be polite after that. I was just a bit incredulous. The job posting is still open now 1 year later, although they refreshed the date.

You should always be polite, you might meet them again in a different time and place. It sounds like this rejection bothers you a lot. You are in danger of not seeing the bigger picture because you are hung up on not meeting that single requirement.

[deleted]

Re: You Only Need 50% of Job “Requirements”

#120

Post by alrehn »

refurb wrote: post #115
jkestner wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because that's how you get Apple Health omitting a monthly bodily function that a majority of the population has. Diversity of perspective makes a better product.

Is that really the reason why Apple Health didn't include menstrual cycle tracking? Or did they just decide not to add it in additional to a bunch of other things?

Not super familiar with that example but another one is all kinds of technology not working well with darker skin.
Post reply on HN