Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Dec 28, 2023. It is now read-only.

Added few examples for recruiting track #14

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Added few examples for recruiting track #14

Changes from 3 commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
e1e4c1d
Added few examples for recruiting track
renanrt Dec 5, 2018
e5f70d8
fix english spelling
renanrt Dec 5, 2018
c021554
added link on how recruiting works
renanrt Dec 5, 2018
9c40034
added more examples to recruitment
renanrt Dec 5, 2018
91802ce
added changes from CR
renanrt Dec 6, 2018
8de351c
addew new line about respect and empathy
renanrt Dec 10, 2018
4a06266
Merge branch 'master' into recruiting
renanrt Dec 10, 2018
918d0a8
removed some dots
renanrt Dec 10, 2018
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
11 changes: 6 additions & 5 deletions constants.js
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1109,7 +1109,7 @@ export const tracks: Tracks = {
summary: "Strengthens Vend's team by bringing in excellent staff members",
milestones: [
{
summary: "Brings new candidates into the pipeline and/or understands how to evaluate candidates at Vend",
summary: "Brings new candidates into the pipeline and/or understands how to evaluate candidates at Vend (https://bit.ly/2KW3n86)",
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

do we want them to have actually evaluated candidates? otherwise, all they need to do is read the confluence page. i guess it's only level 1. 🤷‍♀️

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think reading a Confluence page demonstrates 5 Cs so I'm okay with that.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Not sure we need to link to the confluence page here 🤔

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

removed the or clause

signals: [
"Reviews existing network for hiring leads regularly",
"Shadows interviews to gain familiarity with process",
Expand All @@ -1124,14 +1124,13 @@ export const tracks: Tracks = {
{
summary: "Interviews regularly, helps the team make meaningful hiring decisions, and helps build a diverse pipeline",
signals: [
"Provides clear, objective feedback on candidates (we should have an interview rubric)",
"Interviews candidates with empathy and treats them all with equal respect",
Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

removed this one because that's obvious.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I reckon we should keep it. What's obvious to you or me might not be to someone else (or even our future selves). This example behaviour puts the emphasis on being empathetic and treating others with respect which is something that's imo highly important to Vend

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I agree with Celine. This is not a given for everyone and we can all use a regular reminder to get better at this.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

My point here was that because you're treating someone with respect shouldn't grant you the level 2.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@cecileVend I'm happy to move this one to #1, what do you think?

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@renanrt my handle is @celine-may ;)
Milestone #1 is not about interviewing so this example should stay in milestone #2 imo

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This example is interviewing with respect not just treating someone with respect. Maybe you could re-word the example if you think it's not clear enough

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

uh sorry about the handle. yeah we should reword it.

"Consistently provides clear, objective feedback on candidates (we should have an interview rubric)",
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

remove (we should have an interview rubric)?

Copy link

@edsrzf edsrzf Dec 5, 2018 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I still think there's more we could do to define what we're looking for in a candidate, but that note doesn't belong here.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍

"Researches approaches for sourcing candidates and diversifying hiring"
],
examples: [
"Added observable evidence for interview feedback",
"Added observable evidence for interview feedback in different occasions",
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

on different occasions. 👍

"Started a monthly brunch for candidates to meet Vend employees",
""
"Helped to triage job applications from the talent pool."
]
},
{
Expand All @@ -1144,6 +1143,7 @@ export const tracks: Tracks = {
examples: [
"Wrote fantastic new interview questions that are measurable and insightful",
"Brought candidates into our pipeline proactively, with a high conversion rate",
"Added new questions/exercises to be done during practical tests",
"Proposed useful, tangible improvements to the interview process"
]
},
Expand All @@ -1157,6 +1157,7 @@ export const tracks: Tracks = {
examples: [
"Planned engineering summit on interview process and training",
"Organized and lead Vend's presence at a recruitment fair",
"Set up practical tests for interviews",
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

i think there are potentially two examples here:

  • Conducted practical tests for interview candidates. (imo, this might be level 3)
  • Created new practical test(s) to test the technical capabilities of interview candidates. (imo, level 4)

what do you think?

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I like having the 2 separate examples but imo the 1st one should be a level 2 (as part of interviews regularly) and the 2nd should be a level 3 (Maintains and strengthens the integrity of the current process)

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Conducted practical tests for interview candidates, seems like level 2 because you're just using an existing process? You're not strengthening the process.

"Started internship program"
]
},
Expand Down