1–10 of 64 posts
What companies are actually "fixing hiring" and what are the largest problems you still see in recruiting today?
I've just made a job board for scientists, though it's not launched yet. It's called Research Pizza ( http://research.pizza ).
Hiring is broken because employees and employers have asymmetric bargaining power, which leads to unrealistic expectations. No amount of improved candidate screening will solve that.
Hired, A-List, Vettery, Indeed Prime all fit in the same category. A market place for pre-filtered candidates with known expectations(salary range), Why more than one of these exist, I have no idea. There is nothing innovative in all these companies, just a fancy recruiting firm.
Triplebyte on the other hand definitely trying to change the Status Quo by letting candidates avoid multiple phone interviews. But while it works for limited set of candidates, scaling interviews while still maintaining quality is super tough. Beyond these, there are standard job boards and of course, LinkedIn for networking.
I see the traditional recruiting domain as the following parts: 1. Job discovery(job boards, search engine, distributions(aka zip recruiter). 2. ATS(Applicant tracking systems) which help companies manage interview process. 3. Screening and Preparation(Hackerrank, Leetcode etc)
A lot could be done in each of the following areas, but there's not much innovation so far.
In my view the only companies that are innovating are smaller firms and solo recruiters/consultants who have built up a high level of domain knowledge. This isn't so much innovation as just working well and consistently providing good results.
This isn't to say all small recruiting firms are wonderkins. But the good ones will not only find you good candidates but help consult and guide you where appropriate (this is especially important for startups).
Source: SWE at a small SF based recruiting co. which focuses exclusively on Start-up sales positions. Have been working on modernizing our software stack and have done a lot of competitive analysis over the past year. The people I work with will routinely school me on startups (i'll attempt to show them a new product after reading about its launch on HN and they'll tell me they knew about it two weeks ago).
As the hiring manager, I wish I didn't have to deal with recruiters and their 20% fee. But sourcing candidates and reaching out to them is painful too. OTOH there is too much noise in applications that come through your job board/career page links. Using any of these platforms is a full-time job in itself. Sifting through dozens of profiles and reaching out individually is extremely time consuming.
As someone who had to look for a job, that sucked too. You either go to a recruiter who forces you into a bunch of interviews, or you apply cold.
Referrals definitely make it easier on both sides but you can't always rely on just that one channel.
What can materially improve the discovery process, on both the hired and hiring sides? I think about this often. How can talent find roles suited to it and vice versa? Wasn't technology going to make this a breeze?
Well, my favorite domain. As the standard saying goes, recruiting is hard. It mostly about matching candidates and company's expectation and they tend to wildly fluctuate. Hired, A-List, Vettery, Indeed Prime all fit in the same category. A market place for pre-filtered candidates with known expectations(salary range), Why more than one of these exist, I have no idea. There is nothing innovative in all these companie…