Hiring Smart(Passion) Vs Hiring Qualified(Experience): Who takes the cake?

In today's megalomania ridden, dog eat dog world, the rat race for elusive job placements rages on. Intense, volatile competition often characterise the recruitment sector every year, where hopeful newbies, armed with an armada of wit and expertise wait in the wings to lock horns with hundreds of others, in an engaging battle for supremacy.The cost of finding, interviewing, engaging and training new employees is high. Employees also require desks, computers, phones and related equipment, let alone the largest costs of being an employer—salaries, benefits and taxes.It has led to the establishment of an evolving network which caters and controls several lives. This makes us wonder and feel for the several companies out there- how exactly does one prioritise and know how to draw the line between unbridled passion and qualified expertise?
To state simply, passion is indubitably essential in every employee. Understanding the core requirements of a position and how the candidate satisfies those requirements is important too, as it can go along way in constituting effective work performance.When a candidate openly communicates effectively about their ability and interest in a position, there is also a greater possibility of a long term relationship between the employer and employee. If one observes, receptiveness is often found to be more in the passionate than the experienced interviewees. One of the challenges of hiring for passion over experience is finding a reliable metric for passion. Everyone who wants a job will tell you they're impassioned for whatever the job entails, but much of the time they either just have "passion" for no longer being unemployed or for the status/perks of the position rather than the work itself.
This is why many companies, especially start-ups, are adapting "tryout" models for applicants where rather than relying on a traditional interview they will ask applicants to do some task - a report, presentation, etc. - related to the job in response to the application. Some will drop the task on a Friday evening, due Monday. The applicants that aren't willing to sacrifice a weekend on it are viewed as self-selecting for elimination. Such tryouts not only serve as an ad-hoc measure of "passion" but also result in a deliverable on which applicants can be stratified. In some ways this is similar to military recruiting, where applicants must pass a battery of tests and attend certain obligations long before their first paycheck.
Experience is usually a good indication of a short-term solution, while passion insinuates a candidate and associated positive attitude will benefit the business regardless of present assignments or unexpected modifications of position or business structure. Hiring for experience is like ensuring a business' processes are optimized, but hiring for passion seeks to optimize a business' in-house philosophy and culture. Day-to-day operations could be quickly seen as a photo of microcosmic proportions, but looking at the larger picture, a business demands a good foundation of people. The bottom line is that your company is in business to make money. And to achieve that, you need a combination of both passion and experience. On the other hand, not everyone on your team needs to have equal parts of passion and experience. As mentioned above, lower level staff with lower production expectations can have a larger percentage of passion over experience. Positions with very high-performance expectations in short delivery cycles requires a larger experience percentage over passion. People in management roles need more of an equal percentage of passion and experience.
Different jobs thus entail different requirements. It depends entirely on the industry. You have to weigh the risk of lack of experience versus the risk of lack of passion. Just like everything, hiring too has it's fair share of pros and cons. In terms of consistency and longevity, passion tends to prevail over experience,which caters more to efficiency and overall work performance. Conglomerates and multi-national companies today are effectively favoring this process and as a certain Steve Jobs once said-
“It doesn’t make sense to hire smart people and tell them what to do; we hire smart people so they can tell us what to do.”
Powered by Blogger.