The Military Contractor Hiring Process

[marct]

Hi 120,

I'm currently in competition for a job with a person who is more qualified on paper than I, (according to the job announcement) but if she gets the job, she will be an epic fail: The job announcement says that they are looking for "her", but in reality, what the really need is "me".

'tis a real problem that has only gotten worse in the past 20 years. It's really a problem of numbers: too many people apply for too many positions. The HR "solution" () was to computerize using simple keyword searches, a process that allowed junior HR dweebs to "go through" thousands of resumes an hour. Of course, that meant that you could get rid of those expensive senior HR people who actually knew something about the real job requirements .

So, now lists are king, ~30-50% of HR people doing the hiring have no idea about what they are hiring for, and the name is mistaken for the thing.

BTW, if you want me to give you a reference let me know ....

[Schmedlap]

The HR "solution" () was to computerize using simple keyword searches, a process that allowed junior HR dweebs to "go through" thousands of resumes an hour.

Unfortunately, that keyword system doesn't really simplify things all that much. The keywords just select a bunch of resumes. Those resumes must still be reviewed and applicants interviewed. If anything, the keyword thing makes it more difficult.

I've been through the federal hiring process from the employer side. Absolutely mindless. Five of us were given 25 resumes to review (we were all reviewing the same 25 resumes). We were to rate them in five areas on a 1 to 5 scale and then we would see which 4 of the applicants scored highest. All of the applications were about 3 or 4 pages, single spaced, tiny font, 1/4" margins, and they all sounded the same because the resume was simply a vehicle to deliver all of those keywords to us.

If nothing else, it was an interesting exercise in random number generation. Because all of the resumes were alike, all five of us scored different ones highest and lowest - it was completely arbitrary. But, in accordance with some federal practice, we found the 4 whose scores on our arbitrary scale were highest - even though they were insignificantly higher - and we called them in for the interview.

Then came the interview. We were each assigned a specific question to ask (basically, our jobs amounted to reading a script). In order to ensure "fairness" we had to ask each candidate the same question. The candidates were like their resumes - canned, non-specific responses to cookie-cutter questions. The position was some a personnel slot - similar to a BN or BDE S-1, but dealing with Active, Reserve, and DOD Civilians. I could have asked the same questions to an infantry E-7 and gotten the same answers, and learned about as much about his qualifications.

I think the woman who broke down crying during the interview eventually got hired.

[marct]

Hi Schmedap,

Unfortunately, that keyword system doesn't really simplify things all that much. The keywords just select a bunch of resumes. Those resumes must still be reviewed and applicants interviewed. If anything, the keyword thing makes it more difficult.

Too true! I could tell you stories as well from the hiring side .

I think the mindless bollix-up that many organizations substitute for a real recruitment and hiring process is one of the reasons (amongst others) why so many people are relying on personal networks and contacts to get their next jobs - the recruitment process just doesn't work.

But just wait for the next, web 2.5 enabled, online resume screening software! It will use the latest, bleeding edge technologies and algorithms to select the right person for the right job. And it will do it as well as a a recruiter did in the early 1950's .

[Stevely]

Unfortunately, that keyword system doesn't really simplify things all that much. The keywords just select a bunch of resumes. Those resumes must still be reviewed and applicants interviewed. If anything, the keyword thing makes it more difficult.

Say you had candidates of interest that you would prefer to see in the job. Say they got a hold of the keyword list, prior to submitting resumes. Now things are a lot easier.

[marct]

Say you had candidates of interest that you would prefer to see in the job. Say they got a hold of the keyword list, prior to submitting resumes. Now things are a lot easier.

Nah, the best tactic is to actually sit down with the person writing the actual requirements before they are written up. The best one I ever saw was a Government of Canada position for a website administrator where one of the "required" skills was an extensive knowledge of Baroque music (the site had nothing to do with music). I was tempted to apply just for the fun of it .

[Schmedlap]

Say you had candidates of interest that you would prefer to see in the job. Say they got a hold of the keyword list, prior to submitting resumes. Now things are a lot easier.

They already have the keyword list. I know guys who took courses for their functional area and had instructors from the courses give them keyword lists to include in their resumes should they choose to move into the civilian side of the force. And it still doesn't make it easier, because the algorithm or the lottery machine - whatever is used - does not choose the 1 "perfect" resume. It chooses a bunch that are reasonable matches. You still need to have people dig through the 25 or so resumes.

When I was taught how to write a resume, I was told to make it concise, readable, and within a page or two. These resumes violate all of those rules.

[Ken White]

or hiring announcement and not pick out the keywords probably doesn't deserve the job...

What used to be a one page resume has morphed into a multi page C.V. -- to the detriment of both, IMO.

[CR6]

When I was taught how to write a resume, I was told to make it concise, readable, and within a page or two. These resumes violate all of those rules.

Concur. Resumes for USG jobs are ridiculous. I believe the process would be well served by limiitng all applicants to two pages max, although anyone who understands brevity should be able to highlight their important qualifications within one page.