Is Your Job Description Useful?
Last week I was a keynote speaker on a panel for an alumni group aimed at giving job seekers an "inside out" look at the recruiting process. We discussed things like resume content/format; interviewing tips such as preparation, questions to ask; the role of the phone screen; negotiating final salary.; C; Z6 ]6 _3 H" N2 N% {
! e" _( u# b, e) b u+ J3 b
We went over resume preparation extensively, and when you tell a candidate to tailor a resume based on the job description, it begs the question for me, as a recruiter: are my job postings/descriptions accurate? Am I asking for the qualifications in such a way that potential candidates will be able to determine that they are a good shot? % ~* k) [$ k! F$ ~$ u
/ y5 z9 {, b4 _; EI was recently helping network for a recruiting position that wasn't an "official" posting. It was rather vague, but since it was for a recruiter, I felt confident that other recruiters would be able to see the actual nuances. I was wrong. I got quite a few resumes from non-qualified candidates that it really suprised me. The truth is that Seattle has a huge need for experienced recruiters in various disciplines. Many of the positions are contract for six or more months; but the key word in the previous sentence is "Experienced". As with most industry positions, experience is one of the key factors in finding the "right" talent.4 _) }% m) [2 N# \" G- k
* U$ d: H( v7 uI am currently working on the R & D staffing team, and we recently posted our Research positions, which clearly stipulate a PhD in a technical discipline. It amazes me how many people are applying with a master's or a PhD in a non-technical discipline (like the person with the PhD in education and the BS in psychology...?) I re-read the job description, and it is very specific. * L- c! T" x8 [! G8 S8 X8 ~$ v
- J' `) I. ], t' zAs the SME on recruiting, I often help my hiring managers write or update their job postings. Part of my account management duties include mentoring them in how their effective participation can make for a better partnership overall for both of us, creating a win-win situation. I coach my hiring managers on how to write an effective and compelling job description. Let's face it, a job description is a marketing tool; we are trying to market our need to referrals, passive candidates, and top performers we are pursuing. On the flip side, if we have a strong enough job description, as a recruiter I can quickly weed out those resumes that are just a waste of time. (Like my senior marketing manager req calling for at least eight years of marcomm management. I've been able to weed out about seventy per cent of the candidate pool because this is a firm requirement from the manager.)
( }4 P% J) H0 B& a! @1 k4 ]# i& p. O0 |! V8 \0 Q
Last summer I interviewed at Google for a contract sourcing position, and the "job description" was very vague. When I was speaking to several of the recruiting team, they told me that often they leave their job descriptions vague in an effort to garner more curiosity from the talent pool. I've been pondering this recruiting model. Some of the HR analyses I've seen from Google indicate that their recruiting processes are even more stringent than MS, and I wonder if they truly believe that the top 1-3% of the technical talent in the world is so interested in working there that they are willing to submit their resume for an undefined position? Given some of their growing pains the last few months, it doesn't seem to be working. But only time will tell. Microsoft has the strength of time on our side, with a very wide variety of products and disciplines to draw upon. Google, while a "hot" company, still has a much more narrowly-focused industry presence and is still in those awkward growing years. I look forward to following the company's growth and to see if they continue to follow the "vague" job description online while aggressively headhunting the passive candidates.
