Be the change you want to see in the world!

And by "world", I mean "staffing", while by "change", I really mean "courtesy".

What happens is that the current staffing process is flawed:

1. Staffers reach out to the community, advertising jobs.
2. Members of the community reach out to them, by sending their CVs.
3. Almost never, those members that have responded to the call hear back from the staffers.

Basically, they reach out to the community, they get what they need, then give nothing back to the members of the said community.

This led to the following karmic problem that many staffers are complaining about: we reach out to potential candidates, but most of the time they don't reply back.

YOU. DON'T. SAY. Are they... ignoring you?

I wonder, how did we get here? Could it be that we (potential candidates) are so used to not hearing back from staffers, that we don't even bother replying to their emails, when we get them?

Look, I get it, for each open position, there are tens or maybe hundreds of applications. Is this an excuse for not reaching back saying why the application was rejected? I don't think so. Even if you reply in a couple of months, when time might allow, it is still valuable for candidates to know that hey, at least someone got back to them.

Maybe it's something in the CV, maybe something missing? Maybe some things could be explained better? I don't know, but whatever it is, the applicants need to hear it.

Personally, I think it's a matter of personal etiquette to reply to all requests - I am not looking for an opportunity, I get reached out to, I reply, I move on - and I wish the same courtesy would be learnt by staffers: when you reach out to people asking for profiles, for their data really, the least you could do is to communicate clearly a reason for the rejection.

Also, I think a policy such as "only those of interest would be contacted" denotes a profoundly negative work environment, because it treats the uncontacted as unworthy, even sub-human, because no courtesy whatsoever is extended to them. Disgusting!

That's unfair, that's punitive and harsh, as one can't really measure merit, dedication or expertise solely on a piece of paper. And even if, that still wouldn't be a decent thing to do, not to reply back with something useful.

I wish we returned to courtesy, treating each other as human beings, so with dignity and compassion, in honesty and good faith, for the benefit of all mankind. Else, we will continue to see the success rate of staffing dropping. It's currently 20%. This means, only in 20% percent of the cases, staffing manages to find suitable candidates. This also means that in 80% of the cases, staffing fails to provide suitable candidates.*

Why? I am not sure I understand it myself, but it probably has something to do with staffing having lost the human touch. I mean, when you hire someone, chances are maybe 50%-50%, but the current situation is way worse. 

Why? Is staffing actively rejecting suitable candidates? It certainly looks that way.

Why? Maybe, just maybe, someone has forgotten to be human, and sees CVs as papers, not as mothers and fathers and destinies? After all, what courtesy should a piece of paper expect?

We are so long down the wrong path...

* I've read these numbers somewhere, recently, not sure where, but here, on LinkedIn.