Working for the Weakened

I had a fellowship with the State of California right out of college. One of the projects I worked on was a streamlining of our funding process. Our division had money for groups in the state to have. We worked with these groups to come up with a system that made it an easier process.  Since we were the "government," people weren't always so helpful and trusting. It was aggravating to know all you wanted to do is help these groups secure funding–which they want and need–but there was still resistance. In our staff meetings, we discussed this fact, quoting the Jerry McGuire line, "help me, help you...help me help you...helpmehelpyou!"

I've been looking for a new job lately. The process has changed in the last decade or so. It's changed dramatically since my professional ideal was a job at Miller's Outpost, with the occasional break across the way at Gold Mine for a quick game of Moon Patrol. A resume is the least of your concerns as a job seeker. You need to have social media skills, a LinkedIn account, probably a blog or website with links to previous works. There is far more information available to employers than your work history, educational background and the fact you can type 65 words a minute. As such, it's difficult for HR people to wade through the array of ways potential employees have to present themselves. Since it's hard to know what best to ask for, these job poster, candidate reviewers often ask for everything. It's to the point where HR people are like this: If you could meet God and ask Him one question, what would it be? HR professional answers: Our standard application form 1253 has ten mandatory questions that all candidates must answer or they cannot be considered for the position...

There are not many things I feel like I'm an "expert" at. However, as a longtime journalist, I feel like I'm an expert question-asker. I think I can help these HR people refine their employee hunt a little. The first thing to do is to list ten essential skills for the position, say for cashier at McDonalds. The candidate needs to be cheerful, honest, trustworthy, personable, helpful, service oriented, reliable, well mannered, good with money and articulate. Next, your first HR question should be, are you at least six of these things? Yes? OK, send me your resume.

Next, dispense with the questions about objectives and so forth. Everyone's objective is to get a job and earn a living. The reason they applied is you have a job open. And stop asking people what their salary expectations are.   This is the job. This is what it pays. That information will automatically filter your pool of candidates. True, the occasional sandwich artist will apply for Chief Operations Officer, but those strays are easily eliminated.

Stop asking for candidates to upload a resume and then have them fill out an online form that has the same exact information as the resume. This duplication of process is keeping qualified and desirable candidates from applying, even if only occasionally. Having hired people in the past myself, I know you can take one minute to buzz through a resume and see who is remotely qualified and who isn't. Toss the "not" ones and call the "are" ones. If the pool is small enough by then, invite them to an interview. Seeing is believing. Pro sports teams talk to loads of players–even ones they know they have no hope of drafting. They meet them. They visit. Hey coach, I only talked to 20 of the 2,341 draft-eligible kids on the phone and I know who we should draft... That conversation never happened in pro sports ever.

What is the harm? What exactly are you doing anyway? Isn't hiring a person sort of a priority? Why call, re-call, interview, re-interview and then have a panel interview? Don't you know a talented fit when you see one? If you don't, why are you screening people in the first place? Shouldn't one of the job skills for a HR person be the ability to spot a quality employee? I was a sports writer for a long time. I can watch any game in any sport and spot the kids with real talent in 20 minutes. College recruiters can do it in five. It's your industry and your job to hire quality people. You should be really good at it by now. Post a job, look at the candidates and hire someone already.

Lastly, desist with the cover letter. What does that do? Dear person, as my resume plainly outlines for anyone to see, I have the following experience and education. My applying for this position clearly expresses my interest in working for your company or, frankly, any company that pays a livable salary. Thank you for wasting two minutes of your day reading this letter rather than sifting through resumes. Sincerely, the name on the resume.

Some employers I know have said a cover letter is the first opportunity to see the prospect in action.  This is unfair. As an alive human being living on the Earth right now, chances are the candidate is a horrible writer. Judging from the mistakes I've seen in job postings, someone's writing skill is no indicator of their professional skill and prowess as a synergistic team player.

Post a job, sift through the nonsense of online forms and cover letters, interview 10 people you think will be good and pick one. The best practices process I can think of is imagining the job being done by Sheriff Buford T. Justice (of Texarkana, Texas, by the by) from the film Smokey and the Bandit.  The Sheriff, wading through resumes, cover letters, YouTube videos, Facebook pages, Twitter feeds, and Tumblr accounts says aloud to his future new employee, "now that all the sentimental bullshit is over, where are you, you sumbitch?!"

If the good Sheriff was in charge of HR, job vacancies would be filled like that–you, um...you have to insert the fingers snapping noise. I can't really write it like that.