Hiring the future - Google's new approach to recruiting staff

Google has made a reputation for itself as a great place to work. In some cases, staff work four days, and have the fifth day for their own projects, using Google’s facilities. Not many complaints seem to be coming out of Google staff, either.

Google says “We’re not a conventional company, and don’t intend to become one.” An article in the New York Times indicates they’re pretty systematic about who they hire, and how they hire, but they’re not leaving it at that. A whole new approach to recruitment is currently coming onstream. The company is trying to move away from standard interview methods, and grading qualifications. Research has indicated it’s not a particularly effective method of hiring people, and “a terrible way of predicting performance”. The new idea is to go looking for a fit, using a psychometric test. That’s not unusual of itself, but it makes it interesting, given Google's profile as an employer. Google’s VP for People Operations has said they’re worried they might not find the best applicants using “traditional hiring methods”. The sheer size of Google, which has 10,000 employees world wide, is becoming a burden, and the company says it wouldn’t be surprised if it doubled in size in the next year. How people fit in the workplace matters, a lot. Bad fits cause problems. In a big workforce, a lot of problems. There's a strong element of common sense in this approach. Any manager could tell you endless stories of the disasters created by "people problems". The new system is intended to break through the defects in grade/interview hiring. It’s based on a comparison between a 300 question test which was given to Google employees, which was then compared to “25 separate measures” of performance. This included supervisor and peer reviews. Ironically, given its more or less ubiquitous requirement for college degrees in its job applications, Google says that some levels of education among its staff with doctorates could be a disadvantage, “detrimental” and not all are as well suited to their jobs as others. The new system will be applied to all applicants from this month. It’s clear Google wants a particular fit for its staff, and is trying hard to “Googleize” its hiring process on those lines. It’s easy enough to be cynical about psychometric and cultural evaluations, but there’s an upside. Some workplaces are horrible ordeals, with vicious cultures. Generally, management science ignores employee fits in the workplace, except in the most superficial, bland, mentions. Google has in fact stepped out of the conceptual box (some would say conceptual coffin) with this idea. It’s a realistic approach to what is becoming a huge workforce, where enough friction would be a real problem. Some people simply don’t function in some environments. It uses a profiling method called “organizational citizenship” for staff, which relates to employees doing things which aren’t strictly part of their job, but help make Google a better place. That’s a step up, in terms of managerial emphasis on actual achievements and participation. Since the Industrial Revolution, the workplace has suffered a lot from intrusive management practices, half baked approaches to staff welfare, and bizarre cultural and managerial styles which belong under medical supervision. The relationship with management has suffered severely, because staff were eternally on the receiving end of these erratic, often misunderstood, ideas. To get a better idea of how Google hires, this link gives access to Google Jobs, which is the online hiring point for Google globally. Follow the links, and you’ll see the basic application process. Check out the requirements for a position which interests you. Google doesn’t operate by phone, won’t discuss positions advertised, and won’t contact an applicant until the application is received. That’s not necessarily the best way to do business. They won’t be hiring every applicant for every job. They could save some of their own and the applicants’ time by having a contact point to screen out those who would know not to bother if they had the information they needed. Still, Google says that only 4% of its staff leave per year. That’s pretty good, bearing in mind that at least some of them were doing work related to their future employment at Google, using Google’s facilities. Those staff were obviously moving on in their careers anyway. In all fairness, Google is trying to break the mold of an inefficient, antiquated, system which insists on making fits between people and jobs. In an IQ test, if you fit the wrong pegs in the wrong holes, you’re flunking the test. The normal approach is to try to make people fit jobs, not jobs fit people. It's idiotic, it has never worked, and never will. This methodology, if it works, could reduce the pain for employers and employees dramatically, and it would be accepted globally, because Google, the Dream Job of the IT industry, uses it.