|Name||Contact||Contact2||Contact3||"Hi Dan"?||Omits Resume?||No attachments?||Q1 widget mindshare||Q2 widget disintermediation||Q3 widget disruptors||Q4 widget equity-invested paradigms?||Concise?||Asked Questions?||Availability||Notes1||Notes2|
|Jessica McJobbersteinemail@example.com||523-232-4343||321 Any St|
|Yes||Yes||No||2 yrs experience||1 yr.||17 of them?!? Wow. So disrupty.||Familiar with||Not really. But friendly.||Yes. So many.||20/wk||Touched on seamless supply chain widget disintermediation. The only one to do so.|
|Johnny Middlerfirstname.lastname@example.org||N/A||N/A||Yes||Yes||Yes||Has a widget mindshare blog. Excellent stuff.||Touches on in blog, also 2yrs exp||9||3 yrs experience||For the most part.||Nope.||Full - but lives in Tuvalu time zone|
|Froderich Freunderemail@example.com||487-867-5309||N/A||No||No||No||4 yrs exp||4 yrs||Ony two.||Familiar with||Very.||Yes. Some good.||Full||His website flux capacitor is overclocked to 11.||Seems a bit mechanical vis-a-vis communication|
|Fran Fiddlerfirstname.lastname@example.org||N/A||N/A||Yes||No||No||Minored in it, but no work exp||Disintermediates all the widgets in the yard||5||N/A||Too much so.||Yes. Some good.||15/wk||Fran forgot to put her last name in the email. It was part of the message headers, though.||Maybe no WEIP experience??|
Alrighty then. What is this chart? It's a quick, basic demo of the hiring optimization system described in this blog post. Your chart would likely include more candidates, and other, different, real criteria in some of the columns.
In this hypothetical example, we couldn't use any single knockout criteria because any one would've eliminated far too many or too few job-seekers. So, we’ve whittled out all candidates who failed all three of these knockout tests: Column C: No secondary contact info. Column E: Didn’t greet the person they’re contacting. Column F: Included a resume when we told them not to. ...As long as they did at least one of those correctly, they’re still in the hunt. You’ll want to adjust your knockout criteria to get your candidate pool down to a manageable size, whatever that means for you.
Questions? Hit up the comments of the blog post. Thanks for reading.
|Green||Denotes good stuff|
|White||This is fine.|
|Orange||Definitely not good.|
|Red||This is bad.|
|Yellow||Is this good? Bad? Maybe neither. It's perhaps noteworthy. Yellow means alert. Not necessarily on the good/bad scale.|
|Before color-coding, I always ask if any sheet stakeholders are unable to discern between colors like red/green, and adjust the color theme accordingly. But I like red/green for its obvious skeuomorphic-stoplight value when color blindness doesn't prohibit its use.|
|If it were down to these four candidates, and I had to offer job to somebody without more extensive interviews for some time-crunchy reason, I'd probably offer the spot to Jessica first. Fran last. |
They're already in order. How? Why? Count the Greens first. Then count the reds. Then the rest. But really, you'd do this to choose who to interview more, not to choose who got the job. Right?