This is pretty well-trodden ground. The scalable hiring/matching paths are effective enough and cheap for the bulk of the bell curves (of positions and of candidates). If you’re pretty normal, or seeking a pretty normal candidate, that’s fine.
It’s kind of sad that it’s so difficult to fire people nowadays, because it makes it very risky to hire someone that you’re not pretty confident won’t be terrible. It changes the dynamic from “take risks, hire high-potential” to “avoid risks, hire the safe”. And this really sucks in a lot of ways.
This is pretty well-trodden ground. The scalable hiring/matching paths are effective enough and cheap for the bulk of the bell curves (of positions and of candidates). If you’re pretty normal, or seeking a pretty normal candidate, that’s fine.
If you’re exceptional, or if you’re a startup looking for exceptional employees, then it’s not going to work very well. Tyler Cowen’s Talent (Talent: How to Identify Energizers, Creatives, and Winners Around the World: Cowen, Tyler, Gross, Daniel: 9781250275813: Amazon.com: Books) makes this point very clearly.
It’s kind of sad that it’s so difficult to fire people nowadays, because it makes it very risky to hire someone that you’re not pretty confident won’t be terrible. It changes the dynamic from “take risks, hire high-potential” to “avoid risks, hire the safe”. And this really sucks in a lot of ways.