Comment by juujian
2 days ago
The even bigger challenge is that hiring experts in any domain requires domain knowledge, but hiring has been shifted to HR. They aren't experts in anything, and for some years they made do with formulaic approaches, but that doesn't cut it anymore. So now if your group wants to get it done, and done well, you have to get involved yourself, and it's a lot of work on top of your regular tasks. Maybe more work because HR is deeply involved.
>hiring has been shifted to HR
Well, unless you know sufficiently senior people. But I suspect that is a deeply unsatisfactory answer to many people in this forum.
My long term last, only technically-adjacent, job came through a combination of knowing execs, having gone to the same school as my ultimate manager, and knowing various other people involved. (And having a portfolio of public work.)
Personal networks only disadvantage those who have none.
I suspect many people who don't have strong networks for whatever reason resent that. To which you could probably tack on not having gone to the "right" schools or having a public portfolio.
27 replies →
I saw this at the big corporate (not faang/tech) place I work at. Engineers run and score interviews, but we don't make the final decision. That goes to HR and the hiring manager who usually has no technically background.
Yup, I have seen some really poor decisions as a result of this. I'm also curious - what will be the effect of AI assistance during behavior interviews, etc.
HR are experts in HR, which is to say they have a broader view of the institutional needs and legal requirements of hiring staffing than you do. It's always annoying when that clashes with your vision, but dismissing their entire domain is unlikely to help you avoid running into that dynamic again and again
> hiring has been shifted to HR
Not everywhere. At my company, HR owns the process but we -- the hiring tech team -- own the content of interviews and the outcomes.
I've never seen hiring completely in the domain of HR. HR filters incoming candidates and checks for culture fit etc, but technical competency is checked by engineers/ML folks. I can't imagine an HR person checking if someone understands neural networks.
HR involvement is unavoidable at big companies; and basics like "years of experience for payband" can cause issues. They fundamentally do not understand the job, but somehow have to ensure its not a biased hiring process.
Yes, and it is kind of necessary when hiring people from outside trusted networks. HR makes sure if people are who they say they are, background checks, and so on. Years of experience and so on are crude filters and should be bypassable by the team/hiring manager if the candidate meets the requirements. I know in large companies this can become political.