The Difference Between Good and Bad Hiring Criteria with John Vlastelica | SocialTalent

So let's talk through the difference between bad good and better hiring criteria. Okay, so bad hiring criteria would be something like top rated university degree or worked only at a cool company or 10 years of experience or you know, firm handshake. That would be bad hiring criteria. Good but not the best. Good would be success selling enterprise software to $100 million sized companies in Asia. That's good. Now better would be things like played the primary role in turning marketing generated leads into customers. Successfully selling multi year enterprise software to chief information officers at companies that already had an existing non cloud based enterprise software solution. That was a mouthful, but you heard all the detail in there. Or maybe skilled at contract negotiation for 5 million Euro plus size deals or expertise and cross cultural communication across Asia demonstrated by successful negotiation for big size deals across Asia. Those are examples of hiring criteria that once you write them down, once you hear them, I think you can hear the difference between the bad and the best. The best is getting much more specific and you can visualize what this person should have done in their past to be successful here at our company in this role. And that's what we want from our hiring criteria. I want anyone that reads it, whether they were part of your hiring manager and recruiter conversation or not, to hear it and immediately go, oh, I get what this person's going to be doing now I can build some, tell me about a time questions or some demonstrations or role plays or problem solving exercises that's actually going to get me evidence, evidence of performance that demonstrates they can do this kind of work if they were hired into our company on this team in this role.