[caption id="attachment_3689" align="alignright" width="128"]<a href="http://www.danamanciagli.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/The-Hiring-Process-is-Crappy-on-Both-Sides-of-the-Table.jpg"><img class="size-full wp-image-3689" alt="The Hiring Process is Crappy on Both Sides of the Table" src="http://www.danamanciagli.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/The-Hiring-Process-is-Crappy-on-Both-Sides-of-the-Table.jpg" width="128" height="128" /></a> The Hiring Process is Crappy on Both Sides of the Table[/caption]

<p><b>Scenario #1:</b> I’m a hiring manager with a precious head count to fill. These are not easy to come by, and the risk for making a bad hire is high. So I write a job description, post it on my company’s website and  social media sites, and tell my network and associates. Soon, over 250 résumés come flying in and I (or my recruiter/HR person) start pouring through them. They all look different, they share different levels of information, and I have to play “search and destroy” for relevant skills, experiences, and results.</p>

<p><b>Scenario #2:</b> I’m a job seeker. I could be an internal candidate, already working within the same company or an external candidate, either employed or unemployed. I read the job description and think, “This job is perfect for me.” The instructions are clear to “submit résumé here,” so I press <i>enter</i> and wait. And wait.</p>

<p>There is no goodness in the combination of these scenarios.</p>

<p>With government bids, there is a bid request or “specification” to which the applicant responds in a methodical way that enables the bidder to compare bids. In manufacturing, there is also a specification and the materials, tools, and production process are designed to meet the exact requirements. Period.</p>

<p>Why, then, is this critical employment process so misguided? The hiring company wrote a specification (called a job description) and what do they receive? A chronological spew of random features of an individual’s background.  And maybe, at best, a cover letter that summarizes the spew. Great.</p>

<p>If I could wave a magic wand, I would change two elements of today’s hiring process - effective immediately:</p>

<p><b>Magic Wand Wave #1:</b> Résumés should just be back-up details supporting a new standardized application form. The hiring company should provide a 1-page template for every job as a candidate assessment tool. It will not only help the hiring manager, but greatly assist the candidate, too.</p>

<p>It’s a simple table with two columns and 6-8 rows.  Down the left column, the company highlights the job description’s most important elements. One row may say “requires 6-8 years in marketing research,” another row may say “experience leading cross-functional product development teams” and the next may say “bachelors of mechanical engineering required; MBA preferred.” You get it.</p>

<p>The right column is blank for the candidate to fill out. They are instructed to put no more than 3 bullet points in each row, indicating how they fulfill the item specified. They can give quantitative and qualitative information. The table should be submitted with the applicant’s résumé.</p>

<p>Hiring managers would then have two things: A document to compare candidates across the same characteristics, a writing sample (typos are really bad!), and an observation about the candidate’s ability to follow simple instructions.</p>

<p><b>Magic Wand Wave #2:</b>  All candidates would get a response from the company they apply to. <b><i>Especially</i></b> if the candidate has taken the extra step to provide the relevant insights described in Wand Wave #1. Even a simple automated email indicating the application has been received would provide a more positive brand experience for the job seeker.</p>

<p>There are more changes I would make but we’ll save those for later. What would you change about today’s hiring processes?</p>