Recruitment
Many CVs are rejected for the wrong reasons and many hiring managers don't even realise it is happening.
Somewhere early in the recruitment process, there is often some sort of key word filter applied. Processed by a human, recruitment system or increasingly by AI. It doesn't really matter which. Scanning and filtering for selected keywords: "5+ years' experience in...", "Proficient in XYZ system...", "Knowledge of ABC software..."
If the words match, the CV survives first pass.
Miss out and a real, live (talented?) person gets automatically rejected. Often before a human has read a single line of CV text.
Sounds a bit brutal. I think so anyway.
Here is the part that may be uncomfortable to admit: Filters set up by the Organisation's "Head of Talent Attraction" are not set up to actively look for talent.
They filter out "lack of experience".
There is a significant difference between Talent and Experience.
Want to build a high performing team?
Hire talent ahead of experience.
EVERY TIME. (In big, bold, shouty CAPS!)
Give me the "inexperienced" teenage Lamine Yamal in my football team. EVERY SINGLE TIME. (In even bigger, bolder, shoutier CAPS!)
Take a typical example of screening criteria against which many candidates may be eliminated: Organisations will often reject a candidate who has not used the exact CRM system or accounting software package, a tool they could possibly learn in a fortnight with the right training and support.
Or they do not meet some other "minimum" level required.
I am not talking about genuine "must haves" which could be the right to work in country, a necessary professional qualification like CIMA / ACCA for example. Rather by screening and eliminating candidates based on criteria that is potentially "learnable".
Especially when someone is genuinely talented.
Meanwhile, your Bang Average Joe or Josephine candidate with 6 months specific system knowledge sails through the first pass screening test and on to the next stage. Even as a Bang Average system user who has not used the system for the last 5 years. All because the job spec said "3 months minimum experience using ABC system" as a requirement.
It's also an interesting notion: that technical competence is reached after a set period, rather than through building measurable real skills, knowledge, aptitude, and ability.
If only we had a word to describe someone who had that level of capability...
Career history helps, more importantly, career results and career trajectory.
The person who has smashed all their KPIs year on year and has been promoted three times tells you something no keyword search can: other people, who managed and collaborated with them closely, kept "betting on" them.
That is betting, not gambling on them.
Maybe it's because they have talent.
Would you benefit from professional Talent Attraction or Assessment support?
Email us at hello@whitecubeconsulting.com for a no obligation chat.
Look beyond time served to career results and career trajectory. A candidate who has consistently exceeded targets and been promoted several times shows that the people who managed and worked closely with them kept backing them - evidence of talent that no keyword search can pick up. Avoid screening people out on skills they could learn quickly, and keep genuine must-haves, such as the right to work or an essential professional qualification, as the only hard filters.
Talent assessment is the process of evaluating individuals against defined criteria to inform recruitment, promotion, development or succession decisions. Effective talent assessment combines structured interviews, behavioural frameworks, psychometric tools and other evidence-gathering methods to build an accurate and objective picture of each individual. It is valuable at every level of the organisation and stage of career, not just for senior roles. It can be used in any organisation seeking to make more consistent, accurate and dependable people decisions and want to benefit from a more structured approach to assessment.