attitude uncertain

“We don’t want to overload our candidates with tests or assessments.” That sounds like a sensible approach. How many tests are too many? The answer is usually unclear.

The rationale behind this sensible thought is often fear. Companies don’t want to introduce extra hurdles. Struggling to find talent, why make it even harder?

Statements I’ve heard many times throughout the last couple of weeks; whoever wants to work with us, we’ll hire them. We hire based on attitude, and we’ll train them on the job. Not a bad approach per se, but something is lacking.

Without assessing attitude, there is no certainty if the candidate will thrive.

gaslighting talent

Are companies (and their recruiters) gaslighting their candidates?

When people quit after six months because the job doesn’t align with their expectations the way they thought it would, who is to blame? The company or the candidate?

If the company can’t adequately describe what’s expected for the job, blaming the candidate seems unfair.

If the candidate, on the other hand, isn’t able to clearly express their expectations of the job, blaming the company might also seem unjust.

Both companies and candidates need help expressing job-content and (team) role expectations.