Recruitment is a very delicate task, if you hire one good resource, he/she can take your company to new heights. The way a human reply to your answers with in a short span of 30 minutes is not enough to decide whether he is competent or not. Some people are introverts. They need time in order to show their skills to prove themselves as a potential employee. Judging someone in an interview within “30 minutes” is nothing but killing of merit. How can you say that he/she wont be able to perform by looking at his/her physical appearance and asking few bookish questions? Bookish questions should not be asked in the interview. Skills can be developed but you cannot develop the potential because potential is a self taught and depends only on the individual interest and will. If a candidate is hard working, he will surpass all his peers in a short time. The key is to find the candidate who is hard working and committed.
Just because you are more privileged (and wealthly) to attend the best institutions doesn’t mean you are better than a candidate who has been sidelined cause they went to an average rated university. University name and realtionships needs to be left aside as such typical traditions needs to be changed. HR cannot mention preferred educational institute of candidates in job advertisements concerning the law of equal employment opportunity. However, it is seen that priority is given to candidates from certain universities. It is a concept of Pakistan based HR. Don’t compare it with international standards. Some institutions even don’t consider your past experience, education, physical appearance, knowledge, but the only criteria is their political affiliations with the ruling party specially in Pakistan.
Hunting Potential Employee with the Perspective of HR:
Recruit an A+ candidate if he cannot show his commitment? The main purpose or core objective is to hire a competent human who can take charge of the advertised job. Every interviewer judges a candidate according to his set criteria.
- It’s a rule of thumb that those who are cannot focus on themselves and their grooming, cannot perform the tasks with the same passion.
- HR don’t have personal grudges and judgements.
- It’s difficult to place my coins of those who don’t have passion to improve themselves.
- If he/she is briallinat in his area of expertise than such candidate should be given a platform wothout any hesitation.
- Allow him/her to open his wings and see thr results yourself.
- There should be an open environment provide to the interviewee where he/she can showcase his/her work without having any pressure.
- They should have atleast a basic knowledge what they have gained in their professional studies.
It means as HR one should involve all stakeholders and get a framework which involves a person analytical skills to be shown! That’s why employees are hired on probation and organizations give them chances to evaluate properly after which you are in position to either retain or not.
From Perspective of Potential Employee Candidates:
Leading the Human Resource is convergence of their aspirations and not imposition of organizational desires. Judgment should be based on the expertise you have rather than being on the basis of what univeristy you graduated from or what kind brand you are wearing?
- It’s not about social class or money one have, you don’t need to appear in interview wearing three piece suit with a tie, at least wear sober clothes.
- English or urdu, it doesn’t matter unless whatever you speak, you say it out with confidence, many at times recruiters don’t bother the wrong answers too.
- Interviewer should have a skill to assess the potential , ethics ,attitude , learning ability of the candidate for the selection on merit.
Judging in Interview is an Art
Top graders are usually not very committed. May be it is because they think they deserve much better than they are being offered (due to their top grades) and constantly keep hunting around for new jobs. Hiring the right candidate is not an easy task. There would be many candidates who usually become nervous. Hence, they cannot answer the Interviewer Questions. But on Job they do quite well on the other hand there are Candidates who give Big Talks in the Interview and Impress the Interviewer, but when on Job they fail to perform, so as HR how will you judge the Right Candidate? One recipe you can use to judge someone on how specific you and other side are with the field of position or post. If other side is replying in a way to generate new supplimetary advanced level questions with in required field, means your decision to appoint such candidature is perfect and you can observe excellent results.
Leaders need to put their money where their mouth is and get HR to do its real job: elevating employee management to the same level of professionalism and integrity as financial management. Since people are the whole game, what could be more important? — Jack
Instead of subjecting job seekers to the grueling and artificial setting of a traditional interview, wouldn’t it make more sense to invite them to “work” with the core team for a week or so, get a feel of higher level things without going into too much internal details, and that way everyone in the team would get a solid idea about the candidate, and the candidate herself would get a clear picture of the organization she is looking forward to be a part of. So when we are talking about a scenario where there are 500 candidates for one position, then in this age of ubiquitous webcams and YouTube, it would make more sense to have 2 minute video CV’s that hiring managers can run through without having to strain their eyes on tons of text and rapidly and more accurately filter out those who they think won’t be a great cultural / technical fit. After all, it’s the person you want to hire, not a piece of black and white text with boring details on it. A video allows freedom of personal expression without the anxiety and constraints of the interview, and if you want to hire REAL people, who have to HEAR what they have to say, not what YOU want them to say.