Today we look at some of the most\u00a0common mistakes\u00a0people make when\u00a0writing job requirements on their job descriptions, and how to avoid them.<\/p>\n
We start from this one because it\u2019s my personal pet peeve.\u00a0Stick to qualifications\u00a0and criteria you can realistically select\u00a0for.<\/p>\n
\u201cMust be\u00a0enthusiastic\u00a0with a positive attitude\u201d<\/em>\u00a0does not belong in the list of requirements on the job advert.\u00a0Nobody\u2019s going to think\u00a0\u201cnah, I\u2019m a slob with a negative attitude, better not apply for this position.\u201d<\/em>\u00a0It\u2019s not even possible to self-assess\u00a0objectively.<\/p>\n Plus, I bet money that it\u2019s not even a real requirement.\u00a0Let\u2019s say you found a candidate with all the right skills who was\u00a0\u201centhusiastic but with down-to-earth and pragmatic attitude\u201d<\/em>. Would you really turn her\u00a0down?<\/p>\n Most of the time, such requirements are mere euphemisms, outward expressions of the way we want to think about the kind of people we have in our workplace. Put that in your blurb about your company culture. Not in the\u00a0requirements.<\/p>\n The second most common mistake is\u00a0trying to describe the ideal candidate. In hiring, there is no unique breed of ideal\u00a0candidate.<\/p>\n There is a minimum viable threshold and a diverse set of profiles above that threshold that you\u2019ll end up choosing from.\u00a0Requirements are useful if they can set the threshold, help you screen out the people who are unqualified for the job, so you can focus on choosing among the qualified\u00a0ones.<\/p>\n So, tone it down. Describe the minimum acceptable profile. If you want someone with 4 years of experience in X, don\u2019t write 4 in the requirements.\u00a0Ask yourself\u00a0\u201cif I found someone with 2 years of experience but some other positive quality to compensate, would I consider her?\u201d<\/em>. If yes, put the lower\u00a0threshold.<\/p>\n If this makes you feel you\u2019re settling for less (and who doesn\u2019t want the best for his team?) remember that you haven\u2019t settled for anything yet. You\u2019re exploring your options and postponing the final choice for later.\u00a0We\u2019re not choosing yet, we\u2019re merely disqualifying the ones we should not be wasting time\u00a0with.<\/p>\n Especially in newly formed positions, people have a tendency to create\u00a0completely unrealistic\u00a0expectations.<\/strong><\/p>\n You know, this person who is an engineer, but also good at marketing, and speaks 4 languages, has 5 years experience in our obscure industry, knows a bit of finance, is under 25 years old, from an Ivy League university, will work for equity only and plays the\u00a0violin.<\/p>\n We naturally get carried away and describe what the position needs, without thinking too much if there are actual people combining those skills. Sometimes there are too few, or none at all. If that\u2019s the case, you might have to go back and re-think the role itself or get two separate people to do the\u00a0job.<\/p>\n Here\u2019s a quick trick to avoid creating Frankestein job requirements. Try to think if you know a real person\u00a0fulfilling\u00a0all of them. If you don\u2019t know anyone, that\u2019s a red flag. Try to imagine what this candidate would be like, their background, current job, in other words where would this person be found.\u00a0If this person sounds unreal, then she probably doesn\u2019t\u00a0exist.<\/p>\n Separate your requirements in two sets: The\u00a0must-haves<\/strong>\u00a0are your absolute minimum to even consider someone. All the rest goes\u00a0into\u00a0nice-to-haves<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Be brutally honest\u00a0with the must haves. This is a very common mistake that ruins the efficiency of screening. Someone puts\u00a0\u201cexperience in the telecoms industry\u201d<\/em>\u00a0as a must have. Then they realise that there\u2019s a candidate who doesn\u2019t have that experience but is otherwise perfect. (Plus a few good ones who never applied because they believed you really meant it) So, whatever, let\u2019s have a look at him anyway. \u00a0So, we didn\u2019t save any time screening, instead it only made things more\u00a0complicated.<\/p>\n If there\u2019s wriggle room, it\u2019s not a must\u00a0have<\/strong>.<\/p>\n Must haves are your most important screening tool, it\u2019s the\u00a0blind screen. If you don\u2019t trust them blindly, if you\u2019re not adamant about them, then you have no way to auto-screen the majority of unsuitable candidates and you just wasted a ton of time.\u00a0Be very frugal with them, and very\u00a0accurate.<\/p>\n \u201cMust be hard working\u201d.<\/em>\u00a0Lazy people will say yes to this,\u00a0invariably.<\/p>\n \u201cMust have good communication skills in client-facing situations\u201d<\/em>. People who suck in front of clients will typically think they\u2019re\u00a0adorable.<\/p>\n These are things to assess in the interview, through tests, mock assignments and past work results. You have to get to the trouble of figuring them out.\u00a0You can\u2019t just ask. If you really must know, the only way is to use proxies, which leads us to the next\u00a0tip:<\/p>\n Ask for\u00a0things that help the candidate understand, objectively,\u00a0if they fit the description.\u00a0Give the candidate an\u00a0objective description of what you\u00a0mean.<\/p>\n Instead of\u00a0\u201cvery experienced in enterprise sales\u201d<\/em>\u00a0ask something like\u00a0\u201cclosed more than a dozen sales deals with large enterprise\u00a0customers\u201d<\/em>.<\/p>\n Instead of\u00a0\u201cability to manage large teams\u201d<\/em>\u00a0you could say\u00a0\u201chas managed teams with more than 10 direct reports for at least two\u00a0years\u201d<\/em>.<\/p>\n A good rule of thumb is to\u00a0get rid of all epithets: words like large, senior or excellent should better give way to phrases that include specific numbers or qualities to define what they refer\u00a0to.<\/p>\n Sometimes the best way to find out if the candidate matches the job is to ask the candidate:\u00a0here\u2019s what will be expected of you, are you ok with\u00a0that?<\/p>\n Example:\u00a0\u201cAre you comfortable spending a full day talking to disgruntled and often rude customers on the phone?\u201d<\/em>\u00a0It\u2019s much better than\u00a0\u201cexcellent customer communication skills\u201d<\/em>. It tells the candidate what the job involves and a positive answer in a question phrased like that is better proof of confidence in this particular skill.\u00a0Incidentally,\u00a0this is also a good time to ask things like\u00a0\u201care you eligible to work in X country?\u201d<\/em>\u00a0or\u00a0\u201care you available to start on X date and relocate if\u00a0needed?\u201d<\/em>.<\/p>\n Remember,\u00a0requirements are a screening tool, and if you ask the right questions, non-qualified candidates will probably not apply in the first\u00a0place.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Today we look at some of the most\u00a0common mistakes\u00a0people make when\u00a0writing job requirements on their job descriptions, and how to avoid them. 1. Skip the euphemisms We start from this one because it\u2019s my personal pet peeve.\u00a0Stick to qualifications\u00a0and criteria you can realistically select\u00a0for. \u201cMust be\u00a0enthusiastic\u00a0with a positive attitude\u201d\u00a0does not belong in the list of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1393,"featured_media":10785,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[43902],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10778","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-professional-development"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n2. Requirements are a screening list, not a description of the perfect candidate<\/h2>\n
3. Don’t create a monster<\/h2>\n
4. If you wouldn\u2019t blindly reject for it, then it\u2019s not a must-have<\/h2>\n
5. Ask for things the candidate can self-assess<\/h2>\n
6. Use objective criteria or their proxies<\/h2>\n
7. Ask directly<\/h2>\n