Background or potential?

When there is a recruitment process in progress, the most direct interest from recruiters is typically to find out about the background of the candidates. In other words, what tasks they have been doing, and for whom. Also, though in principle a bit less important, where and when. Mainly.

How candidates are evolving to the future and why they are interested in this or that career path, is in principle, less relevant. Surprisingly.

The above has been stated from a rather philosophical point of view, and it may be worth elaborating a bit more to understand some reasoning behind this. When it makes sense to be so focused in the past experiences and when it may be wise to invest time in understanding candidate’s expectations, in order to proper invest in the business.

If the recruitment process is intended to fill a very technical position, id est, it requires very specific and qualified skills, which can only be obtained through high and/or specialized education (e.g.: calculations, software, etc.), then, of course, previous expertise in those areas will seriously determine the chances of the candidate to be shortlisted. Basically, it does not make any sense to hire somebody if does nor have those capabilities, independently of future career motivations. If the employer has concrete needs, there is no discussion about it.

The same approach should also be predominant when the recruitment is related to a temporary position (e.g.: 6-12 month contracts). This is a money-for-the-job context. There is a need from an employer to source capabilities, for specific and concrete reasons (e.g.: a project) and the requirement is to execute something well defined in a rather short period of time. Therefore, there is little space for training and evolution of employees. A quick execution demands that the majority of duties to be performed must be already in the (past) skillset of candidate.

But let’s shift now into other main type of recruitment processes: permanent positions, for big (multinational) companies.

When an employer is hiring someone permanently, the smaller the company, the bigger the impact of not selecting the right candidate. A bad decision can be very harmful since the costs of onboarding personnel may be significant in comparison to other fixed costs. In these cases it is preferable to look carefully to both past achievements and future motivations of candidates.

However, when we are taking about consolidated big companies, the situation should be looked at from a different angle. In most cases, actually, these employers support that employees “regularly” shift to other positions within the organization, in order to diversify career and spread and interchange knowledge and culture.

As former employee of big companies, I have performed myself duties that were not related at all to what was described in the original Job Description. And I have also witnessed the onboarding of new colleagues that shortly after were assuming another role, different from the original one. Accordingly, what is the point of sourcing candidates looking majorly to their background? Is it not more important, or even actually the main aspect, to understand the true potential and motivations of the candidate? In which direction the person wants to go, and why, and how.

As a recruitment partner, in ZenoTalent, when there are permanent opportunities to be filled, we dedicate careful time to try to understand the professional and personal motivations of the candidates. On the other hand, we also believe it is our responsibility to engage with employers and emphasize the relevance of looking sharply to the person (the attitude, the interpersonal skills) than to what has been done so far and is written on a paper.

We could even go to the extreme of it. For big multinationals which “can afford” some wrong recruitment processes (within hundreds or thousands), would not be better to just hire when a true potential is identified? Before waiting for when a specific opening with a specific job description is available? Please, employers, when you just come across good talent, hire them, and place them somewhere. It is all about the people. If they are good, they and the employer will find a way to make them profitable for the company, one way or another.

A special remark to Engineering firms since they are very much related to ZenoTalent scope of work. Regardless they are big and multinational corporations, they should be considered outside the previous debate. The scope of work in these firms is very well disseminated into engineering specialities, with clear job assignations; accordingly, for those specialized roles, it is of high importance to hire employees who already have the expertise in the corresponding area. Career paths are more linear within the specialities and it is less expected to swing among different departments. In that sense, other skills and motivations are less relevant when sourcing a candidate.

In the end, if you would have the chance of influencing, or even directly deciding on the sourcing of candidates for your corporation. Would you rather focus on background or on potential? Looking to the past or to the future?

Ignacio Vilas Eguileta

zenotalent Owner & Founder