| > I'm not sure why companies over-list. My theory falls apart outside of the tech industry, but I'll list it here anyway: Manager: We want to hire a good programmer HR: Sure - What decides that Manager: uh.... HR: Do they need to know a particular language or framework? Manager: Well, that's nice, but actually any good programmer can pick this up, knowing it in advance doesn't mean much, particularly if they pre-know a style that is different than ours. HR: How about length of experience? Manager: No, that doesn't really map to how good that experience is. [ Editor: I'm lying here. They always want Senior devs that can hit the ground running. And more often than not get no one for a long time. ] . HR: I have 5 million hits on Linked In for Resumes that cover "programmer"...I need something to narrow this down. Cycle a few times on those criteria and you end up with the unnecessary requirements. The fact of the matter is that experience and skill ( or talent and promise) are important, but we have no way to quantify them. So they over require and they can pick someone that meets some of their criteria that makes them happy. That they reject good matches is regrettable, but they represent (they assume) only a small portion of the total filtered out applicants. Those that have more rigorous requirements ( govt or govt contractors, for example) just shift the over-requirements from "required" to "preferred". |