A Failed Search

I've participated in enough hiring processes to know that organizations sometimes settle for a less than ideal candidate. By the time we've gone through 90-120 days of a hiring process we just want it done. Ideally we have multiple strong candidates to choose from. More often than we would like to admit, we lose top candidates during the process, leaving us to choose from "okay" choices. We don't want the "okay" hire, we want the next superstar.

The Talent Acquisition definition of a "failed search" is a search that does not produce a hire. I understand that is standard terminology, but it has the wrong connotation. Deciding to not settle for a mediocre candidate is far from failure.

Every hiring manager faces the same conundrum: we want someone good, and we want to hire them quickly. Our current team is stretched thin doing the work this new hire will do in addition to their own workload. However, rushing into the hire without the right candidates is more damaging long-term, as it lands us with mediocre coworkers.

None of us want more mediocre coworkers. Mediocre coworkers do just enough to meet the requirements of the job description, but deliver nothing else. They will often hold the exact same position for years on end, touting the number of years they have been in the same role doing the same work. They don't have twenty years of experience, they have two years of experience that was repeated ten times. They enjoy exceptionally stable organizations that don't push them to change. We don't need to hire more of that.

We create the future of our organization with every hire. If we have to start a search over from the beginning, so be it. A few more "failed searches" will result in more successful hires.