1:00 read | Chime in on LinkedIn here and Twitter here
4 weird hiring biases I’d never thought I’d see:
👉”Passive candidates aren’t interested enough.”
As in candidates from outbound recruiting take a back seat to inbound applications.
Because they’re not as motivated? Or don’t want it as much? I can’t wrap my head around it.
👉”Gotta have B/C round funded company experience.”
If you were in one that failed, you’re hungry. If you’re in one that succeeded, you have insights.
Mind you, we’re talking worker bees. Not founders or heads of strategy here. 🤷
👉Pretty much anything related to time zones.
This one I get. It’s just not something I thought I’d ever see as a top level vetting point.
When you’re fully remote, there are still geographic (or time availability) limits. From an employee satisfaction standpoint, you don’t want people working crazy hours anyway. Cool.
But I do wonder if there's a missed opportunity. At least in some functions. Having your customer success and tech support spread across time zones is a no brainer.
But once you’re doing that, couldn't you adjust the rest of the remote work model to take advantage of the talent market? Does everyone truly need to be working the exact same time block?
👉”Why would anyone leave such a good company?”
As in they must suck if they’re leaving a cush gig. Based upon an outsider’s view. Yet we all have enough life experience to know things aren’t always what they seem.
Just some food for thought on a Monday.
You can follow me on LinkedIn here and Twitter here. Join the discussion on this LinkedIn post (or give it a 👍) here.