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

We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

resumeskills.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 810 posts

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#11

Post by SamuelAdams »

It sounds to me that this might be a problem with startups. I've been working in the enterprise space for 5 years, and I've never come across this sort of hiring.

The last job I applied for was open from February 1 - March 1. After that, they pulled it down and began interviewing candidates. Six weeks later, I have an offer letter for a specific role with a well-negotiated compensation package.

Personally if HR treats you the way OP is saying, my guess is you don't want to work for that company anyways. Interviewing experienced people is more the company needing to sell themselves to the candidate, rather than the candidate sell themselves to the company.

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#12

Post by exelius »

BowBun wrote: post #4

One important point I didn't see mentioned was the other side: engineers also think they're worth more than they are. I posit the big VC-backed or FAANG companies 1) can offer huge initial salaries to not have to deal with competition 2) hire juniors at high salaries because they can afford to spend 1-2 years training them. Combine with the sheer volume of hiring they all perform, and it starts to set some false expe…

There’s a lot of brain drain going on at consulting companies as everyone flees a dying industry for 30% raises at FAAMG companies as they start to tackle vertical industry offerings. They’re all aggressively attacking the enterprise space.

These companies just have profit margins high enough to afford to blow everyone out of the water with their offers. They’re competing with each other for the top talent, and it makes it really hard for companies in other industries to retain their best and brightest.

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#13

Post by dvtrn »

Aloha wrote: post #3

I broadly agree with the basic point this guy is making, we have an issue where the HR gatekeepers (who don't have the knowledge to make accurate technical assessments) are effectively searching for a perfect match, rather than someone who could do the job well. Don't put box tickers in charge of a critical function unless you want every thing they touch to be turned into an exercise in box ticking.

Conway’s Law strikes again?

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#14

Post by ddelt »

BowBun wrote: post #4

One important point I didn't see mentioned was the other side: engineers also think they're worth more than they are. I posit the big VC-backed or FAANG companies 1) can offer huge initial salaries to not have to deal with competition 2) hire juniors at high salaries because they can afford to spend 1-2 years training them. Combine with the sheer volume of hiring they all perform, and it starts to set some false expe…

In one way I do agree with you (there are some clear cases where a junior candidate is asking for way too much, without skill to back it up), but my impression of recruiting in the tech space is that, in large part, this industry is undergoing a shift in the balance of power, where employers are finding it difficult to dictate salaries for job titles. In my opinion, it is really refreshing to see that talent actually feels empowered enough to ask themselves if they are worth more, and confident enough to turn down roles for ones that pay more.

My personal anecdote is that I took the first tech job that was offered as a junior, a little bit before this reversal started taking place, and as a result, I left a lot of money on the table. Years later, I realized that if I had just said no, and extended my search a little bit longer, or had role models telling me my knowledge at the time was worth a lot more, I might be worth a lot more right now (factoring in compound interest with sensible investing of excess profit from work + modest lifestyle).

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#16

Post by solatic »

Question - why even bother having "box tickers"? When you post a job listing, write a short blurb about the company culture and what the job itself involves. Don't bother listing "requirements" or "boosters", because the fact of the matter is, people will send resumes which don't meet your "requirements" and in order to put a boost-worthy resume at the top of the pile, you need somebody to read it in the first place to decide whether it deserves to be boosted to the top of the pile, in which case... it was already read in the first place. And that's assuming you even have a stack of resumes in the first place, which in engineering is a reason to put your hands together in silent thanks that you've become successful.

The hiring manager should already have an idea what level of experience is needed, what kind of budget exists, and how quickly the hire needs to be made by. Winnowing down from a stack of resumes to an offer is the art of compromising on those three axes. If your job opening can actually legitimately be kept open for that long (i.e. for a year plus, with no consequences), you should probably reassess whether you need to hire for the position in the first place.

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#17

Post by amenod »

Aloha wrote: post #3

I broadly agree with the basic point this guy is making, we have an issue where the HR gatekeepers (who don't have the knowledge to make accurate technical assessments) are effectively searching for a perfect match, rather than someone who could do the job well. Don't put box tickers in charge of a critical function unless you want every thing they touch to be turned into an exercise in box ticking.

Yeah right! This is not a problem of the HR, this is a problem of the upper management. HR is only doing what they are paid to do, and if there is no oversight how they do it the it's an issue with the leadership. But I don't buy that. I think they are trying to buy "suckers" and only shell out for "experts" when they really need to. Unfortunately I think they are hurting themselves, but hey, it's a free world...

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#18

Post by Aloha »

burtonator wrote: post #5

I had a recruiter call me a year ago with what sounded like a really amazing offer. Working for a well funded startup on a problem in which I happen to be a domain expert. They're aren't many expects in my field with my background and skill set and they said the right things to get me to interview (compensation won't be a concern). Anyway... Went in for 4-5 interviews. Took me about 10 hours in total to interview wit…

Yeah, I see this all the time too, they offer 50-60% of market rate and wonder why they get no takers.

Re: We Don't Have a Talent Shortage. We Have a Sucker Shortage

#19

Post by raghava »

Aloha wrote: post #3

I broadly agree with the basic point this guy is making, we have an issue where the HR gatekeepers (who don't have the knowledge to make accurate technical assessments) are effectively searching for a perfect match, rather than someone who could do the job well. Don't put box tickers in charge of a critical function unless you want every thing they touch to be turned into an exercise in box ticking.

> HR gatekeepers (who don't have the knowledge to make accurate technical assessments) are effectively searching for a perfect match, rather than someone who could do the job well.

IMO, that's just a symptom. The real problem is that the hiring managers/engineers find the job of "recruitment" beneath them.

All of us know the recruiter might not really understand the difference between "java", "scripting" and "javascript". But then, why should that role exist? That role exists because the engineers/managers/leads/architects (generally, the tech folks) just don't want to do the grunt work (search and source candidates, co-ordinate and schedule interviews etc). The actual folks in need of teammates/additional people want a piece of the action alright, nobody wants to miss being an interviewer where one gets to go on a power trip asking the poor candidate to balance B+ trees or some such thing, while letting out tch-tch noises like a lizard watching the poor candidate struggle on the whiteboard.

All that needs to be around is a tool/system that can make the job of searching/sourcing/co-ordination easier for the actual hiring managers/leads who are looking to add people to their teams and have got the necessary budgetary stuff covered already.

Post reply on HN