8 September 2015
Screening Process and Selection Criteria
This is a topic I have written about many times before, but it
keeps presenting itself- selection criteria and
the screening process!
It's interesting and equally disturbing to hear literally
hundreds of recent stories from candidates about their application,
interview process and reasons for rejection from clients!
We all know it is currently, to some extent (depending on the
role) a "buyers market". That's the incorrect perception. There are
some brilliant technical professionals seeking work and many have
been out of work for up to 2 years! Their fault? Not always. Poor
resume formatting? Not really. It's generally and predominantly a
function of the global mining market at present. Easy to get
disheartened, no doubt, but try not to take it personally.
So what is the issue for these great candidates? Two things -
the selection criteria and initial screening process.
Now, we all see the Seek ads by clients stating that you must
have (for example): 5 years experience, nickel, Surpac, open pit
production, must be based in WA, be left handed, support Hawthorn
and own a 15 year old pair of worn in RM Williams. Certainly
narrows the field, doesn't it!
I am seeing SO many candidates screened out of the process for
missing one of the criteria! They might have different software
exposure - so what!? What's the difference? If you can drive
software, it doesn't take long to become proficient in another.
They might have other commodity exposure! Gimme a break! How long
does it take a Geo to adapt and become proficient in another
commodity - skills & fundamentals are transferrable, theories
and procedures for mining (for example) are often identical. They
might be living in another state - so? Have you bothered to ask
whether they have a house in Perth (for example), or can relocate
back there at zero cost on short notice? Nope - they're screened
Worse yet - you are screening out candidates that
might not tick every menial & often irrelevant box (Want Vs
Must Have), but will easily adapt and evolve quickly into the role.
You are screening out some of the best cultural fits
you'll ever see due to your overly specific "key word" search
Every day I see it! I can put forward some of the best people
around for your roles - massive assets to any organisation
culturally AND technically, but do they progress further? Rarely.
They don't "tick" every box.
The candidates that tick every box on the resume "key word"
screening process are the ones to progress. At this stage they're
just words on paper - not the best people culturally. You
are missing out.
Other examples I hear daily are not dissimilar to Goldilocks and
the 3 Bears! "The client wanted 5 years experience and I got told I
had too much experience with 7 years!" Are you joking me! How much
value could someone like that add to your organisation? It was only
a few years ago that clients were walking over broken glass for
candidates like that. They're keen, will accept the $$ and if
screened correctly will likely be a long term, loyal employee who
can easily be promoted over time and add massive value
to your bottom line.
It's a counter intuitive mentality and frankly the screening
process is broken!
It's this narrow minded, short sighted screening approach that
is severely affecting great candidates securing roles and great
clients equally missing out on the best people!
Can I fix it? Absolutely. I am a mining professional - I know
people - I am networked - This is what I do - I know how to balance
the right skill set you need with the relevant cultural fit
Balance your internal recruitment function by partnering with an
external provider - achieve the best results, secure the best