|
|
|
|
|
|
by DHowett
4544 days ago
|
|
|
Engineer-to-engineer recruiting works to some extent, but only as long as your engineers are willing to tolerate it. Airbnb, for example, has (had?) an "Always Be Recruiting" dogma: Get your engineers so psyched about the company that they go forth and witness to every engineer they know. It seems to work–at least, until you dig deeper. The nigh-unto weekly "most recruiting recommendations" statistics single out the few who are willing to share the Kool-Aid, and–more importantly–the many hundred who are not. If your engineers are made to look bad because they're not proliferating their trade at every tech talk, it's a bad sign. As an aside to my aside, this article seems to ignore the glaringly-obvious "Have the CEO do the recruiting" conclusion. |
|
|
Comparative advantage. It's likely that the CEO's time is better spent elsewhere even if he's also the best at getting responses to recruiting.
Maybe the right answer is to have a recruiter recruit using the CEOs account, pretending to be the CEO and then handing people off to the recruiter version of themselves when they reply.