.
.
Job descriptions frequently begin with a phrase that has become a staple in the hiring world:
"The ideal candidate must have..." followed by a list of skills, qualifications, and traits.
Reality check: the "ideal candidate" rarely exists.
If this “ideal candidate” did exist, would they even be in the job market looking for a new role at the time?
If they are in the job market, currently doing the same role the hiring team is looking to fill, then wouldn’t they be looking to make a move up for more salary, or more challenge, or more responsibility, or more learning potential or more opportunity to advance, etc.? They are not interested in making a lateral move to this opportunity.
Why then, is there often this disconnect between the skills, education, and experience that a hiring team or hiring manager writes on a Job Description that a candidate “must have”, and the skills, experience and education that available candidates in the market do possess?
The two most common reason this occurs:
The First Reason
Often a role becomes available due to an employee leaving the company or getting promoted. The Manager of that team still has pressure and demands to continue to meet deadlines and objectives, regardless of the loss of manpower. The first thought that pops into the head of the hiring manager is that:
Therefore, in the Job Description, they write the precise skills, education, and responsibilities that the incumbent had. Hoping a new person could pick up immediately where the incumbent left off. They neglect to objectively answer this question:
Answering these a hiring manager will quickly see that often the reason the incumbent left was because the role no longer satisfied them. They left for either more salary, bigger challenge, greater responsibilities, growth to management, opportunity to learn new skills, or something of this nature. If these existed a “clone” of this incumbent, and this “clone” wanted to change jobs, then a hiring manager needs to realize that the clone would also be motivated to leave their firm for one of the same reasons that the incumbent left. The vacant role is not a positive career move or step up for the “clone”.
Solution:
“What was the experience of the incumbent a few years back when they joined the team and the company?”
If the incumbent was an overall good employee, who brought value to the firm for several years, then look for the “clone” of who the incumbent was a few years ago when they were hired. Was the incumbent quick to learn what they did not know? Did they take on tasks and show initiative? Etc.
In the interim, take the opportunity to evaluate who on your current team could take on some of the responsibilities vacated by the incumbent. Many will thrive at learning and growing and see this as a positive. Help retain them as the opportunity can allow them to grow.
The Second Reason
Lack of awareness of the Candidate Marketplace
This can happen often when a hiring manager and/or the firm have experienced very little turnover in the last few years. They just have not had the need or opportunity to interview many candidates so they are not fully aware of what skills, education and experience candidates currently in the marketplace possess and what they are currently earning.
Solution:
Conclusion: The "ideal candidate" is a myth, and job descriptions should be seen as guidelines rather than rigid requirements. By acknowledging these limitations and being flexible in the hiring process, companies can find and develop talented individuals who may not tick every box but have the potential to excel in the role.