say you're a small company recruiting…

who would you hire?


  • Total voters
    36
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

alecstilleyedye

nothing in moderation
Moderator
for someone experienced who's leaving, and you've a choice of a shiny new graduate, enthusiastic (presumably) and cheap, and an experienced person who can bring additional new skills that can add value to what the business can offer its clients, but more expensive…

i'm the latter part of the conundrum, apparently, but what would you do?
 

ianrauk

Tattooed Beat Messiah
Location
Rides Ti2
Being a small business, it's about what a person actually knows rather then what one has learnt in University. Good people are worth paying for.
 

alans

black belt lounge lizard
Location
Staffordshire
This
an experienced person who can bring additional new skills that can add value to what the business can offer its clients, but more expensive…

would be my choice
 

marinyork

Resting in suspended Animation
Location
Logopolis
I would think that many small companies would overwhelmingly go for the middle option - whether one thinks that is right or not. There's a lot of cultural baggage that goes against hiring graduates in such situations, some of it justified, some of it complete fiction and misconceptions. According to the favourite collector of statistics 25% of the working age population 22-64 have degrees and obviously the percentage of people going to university has been in the 40%s for some time. So if someone is making a big deal out of it you have to ask, why?

You should just select the person at random.
 

ACS

Legendary Member
I was having a similar discussion yesterday and the recruiter said he had nice shiny new IT graduates coming out of the ying yang what he needed was experienced engineers who knew how to find and fix. Go with the experience.
 

berty bassett

Legendary Member
Location
I'boro
i looked into taking a lad on in the building trade a few years ago - thought there was a lot i could teach him and in the end it would help - but found out he wasn't allowed up ladders - so loading out was out - wasn't allowed on a mixer or any other power tools unaided so mixing was out and had to have one and a half days at college along with all holidays paid -- just un-doable so now got experience bloke helping when i need help and i help him when he needs help . the young don't stand a chance as they are not viable
 

marinyork

Resting in suspended Animation
Location
Logopolis
You could ask them what they know from university? There's a radical idea. No, really, I'm serious :biggrin:.

The problem with selection processes is we have this weird system for graduates. We only care about a number, the name of a subject and where they went. No one ever asks them what they actually studied. So you get the nameology phenomenon where something that sounds 'good' people are impressed by without any further questions and that something that sounds 'bad' gets thrown in the bin. Thankfully we're changing the system to have a bit of paper that actually tells you about the stuff they did. Employers might even read it!

If you ask them stuff they'll say all sorts of things, good and bad.
 

Sittingduck

Legendary Member
Location
Somewhere flat
How is the graduate meant to get any experience, if nobody is willing to take them on? Pros and cons for both - it would depend on the individuals and how essential it was for the new person to be able to 'hit the ground running'. Which, I suppose depends on current workload of the firm.
 

Friz

The more you ride, the less your ass will hurt.
Location
Ireland
It's a gamble regardless. I worked for a boss once who's motto was, "I don't care if you know the job. As long as you have the ability to learn." Since then I have worked with guys with 15 to 20 years experience who are totally useless after a year in the job. And graduates (not to mention work experience students) who can soak up anything you tell them and be up to speed in a matter of weeks.

So it's option 3 for me.
 
Top Bottom