Job lotteries

[Four Cofffee]

How would people feel about job 'lotteries'.

I work with a company who have about 50 vacancies for a particularly attractive type of job. It doesn't have any particular academic qualifications required and much of it is about dealing with people which they can't really assess until they get them in for interview.

Invariably any advertising (web, newspaper, radio etc.) leads to an absolute flood (often thousands) of applications which swamps them and they then have problems coping with making a decisions as to who to decide to bring forward for interview. They do have an intial CV sift which currently takes out most of them but they are stil left with vast numbers, too many to interview. Their experience is that the CV sift is a fairly blunt tool and if they simply raise the standard at CV stage there are people who would be excellent in the job but who just have an average looking CV. It then just becomes a test of who can bullst best on on a CV.

What they are thinking about is creaming off the ones who have very good CV's (lets say 10%) and then offering the rest of the interview places on a lottery basis to those whose CVs look promising and meet the minimum standard.

[condor]

If it's people skills you're after then suggest that a passport size photo is needed for the application. Some people have very kind faces so you would expect them to be good at a people related job.
Would also sift out the ones who are too lazy to get a pic sorted, any airbrushing of pic would be easily spotted at interview stage etc.

Think about having group interviews as being cost/time effective to narrow the field down.

[Alex]

Have X-Factor/Britain's Got Talent style auditions.

[magpie215]

Did hear a story how true I do not know of a cv sift like this

big room small table

throw cv's up in the air the ones which landed on the table got an interview.

[Stevenj214]

Four Cofffee said:

How would people feel about job 'lotteries'.

As a concept, I'm completely against it. I believe the best applicant for the post should get the position. I can understand the problems with lack of resources to find that best candidate though.

How about using a '1st round' online interview/questionnaire type thing. I'm sure there are some designed to find candidates with the best people skills.

Alternatively, outsource round 1 to a company which can conduct telephone interviews.

[Four Cofffee]

Stevenj214 said:

Four Cofffee said:

How would people feel about job 'lotteries'.

As a concept, I'm completely against it. I believe the best applicant for the post should get the position. I can understand the problems with lack of resources to find that best candidate though.

How about using a '1st round' online interview/questionnaire type thing. I'm sure there are some designed to find candidates with the best people skills.

Alternatively, outsource round 1 to a company which can conduct telephone interviews.

They have a questionnaire type sift built into the Cv stage which takes out about 65% (and probably some good candidates who are not just great on paper). Telephone interviewws might be an option as I am doing some work with them around the employees they took on and who flunked the job to see if that could be spotted during interviews.

They alos have all the equal ops stuff in their head and randon selection for interview meets that very well.

[Puggit]

I used to share a flat with an HR manager at Coca-Cola, as you can expect jobs there receive a lot of applications.

For the CV sifting, she had 5 seconds per CV. There is a real lesson in making your CV stand out!

[CommanderJameson]

magpie215 said:

Did hear a story how true I do not know of a cv sift like this

big room small table

throw cv's up in the air the ones which landed on the table got an interview.

Weeds out unlucky people.

[ShadownINja]

Make vaguely suitable candidates do a test/write a report. Best ones get an interview.

[Stevenj214]

Four Cofffee said:

Stevenj214 said:

Four Cofffee said:

How would people feel about job 'lotteries'.

As a concept, I'm completely against it. I believe the best applicant for the post should get the position. I can understand the problems with lack of resources to find that best candidate though.

How about using a '1st round' online interview/questionnaire type thing. I'm sure there are some designed to find candidates with the best people skills.

Alternatively, outsource round 1 to a company which can conduct telephone interviews.

They have a questionnaire type sift built into the Cv stage which takes out about 65% (and probably some good candidates who are not just great on paper). Telephone interviewws might be an option as I am doing some work with them around the employees they took on and who flunked the job to see if that could be spotted during interviews.

They alos have all the equal ops stuff in their head and randon selection for interview meets that very well.

I'm trying to think back to when I was looking at graduate schemes - almost the ultimate 'sifter', with many years experience. The process was normally:

1) Application/CV/Competency based questions
2) Telephone Interview
3) Assessment Center
4) Job Offer

Add in a technical test somewhere if appropriate, and a final formal interview between Assessment Day and Job Offer, and there's not much more you can do other than random lottery.

[escargot]

ShadownINja said:

Make vaguely suitable candidates do a test/write a report. Best ones get an interview.

Yes.

Job lotteries won't help you ensure you're getting the best of the bunch.

[Deva Link]

I knew someone who worked in HR for a car manufacturer and they got thousands of applications every year for their apprenticeship scheme.

They put them in two piles as they came in and then threw one pile away.

[Four Cofffee]

escargot said:

ShadownINja said:

Make vaguely suitable candidates do a test/write a report. Best ones get an interview.

Yes.

Job lotteries won't help you ensure you're getting the best of the bunch.

Sadly the politics of it all in the public sector suggest fairness and perceived fairness has the upperhand over getting the best person!

[Deva Link]

Four Cofffee said:

escargot said:

ShadownINja said:

Make vaguely suitable candidates do a test/write a report. Best ones get an interview.

Yes.

Job lotteries won't help you ensure you're getting the best of the bunch.

Sadly the politics of it all in the public sector suggest fairness and perceived fairness has the upperhand over getting the best person!

Hmmm. A friend of ours works for a Government dept and they went through the whole massive rigmarole that is public sector recruitment and still gave the job to the office manager's daughter.

My daughter works in the NHS and it's common for jobs to only appear on the website for a couple of hours.

[nipperS2K]

magpie215 said:

Did hear a story how true I do not know of a cv sift like this

big room small table

throw cv's up in the air the ones which landed on the table got an interview.

so thats why Im not getting any interviews.

[dilbert]

Four Cofffee said:

How would people feel about job 'lotteries'.

I work with a company who have about 50 vacancies for a particularly attractive type of job. It doesn't have any particular academic qualifications required and much of it is about dealing with people which they can't really assess until they get them in for interview.

Invariably any advertising (web, newspaper, radio etc.) leads to an absolute flood (often thousands) of applications which swamps them and they then have problems coping with making a decisions as to who to decide to bring forward for interview. They do have an intial CV sift which currently takes out most of them but they are stil left with vast numbers, too many to interview. Their experience is that the CV sift is a fairly blunt tool and if they simply raise the standard at CV stage there are people who would be excellent in the job but who just have an average looking CV. It then just becomes a test of who can bullst best on on a CV.

What they are thinking about is creaming off the ones who have very good CV's (lets say 10%) and then offering the rest of the interview places on a lottery basis to those whose CVs look promising and meet the minimum standard.

I'm not in line for the kind of job you're offering, and I'm not sure I'm one way or the other about lotteries.

What I will congratulate you on, is a logical recognition of a significant problem (for an employer and an employee), and then the ability to communicate that openly.

I wish you well, in finding the right people.