Recruitment Processes

Making job applications can be frustrating. No one has the time to tailor their resume to each role. And, what is worse is that the recruiter is likely to only be hunting for keywords. If they use an application tracking system it will likely have its own approach to matching. The hiring manager will have their own needs. Most companies have a failed recruitment process where many able candidates are rejected through inadequate recruiters and systems. Automation does not help candidates. However, everyone needs to be given a fair chance of review. Unprofessionalism is typical in most recruitment processes. What is worse is when a candidate goes through multiple stages and towards the end the employer is unable to get funding approval for new hires. Not only is it unfair and frustrating for candidates but it also wastes time on both sides. Streamlining recruitment processes is important for every responsible organization as it is the first point of contact for individuals. Bad recruitment processes is a negative reflection of an organizational practices and the way they treat customers. If the individual has a bad experience as a candidate, they will likely be less inclined to join the company as an employee. All in all, bad recruitment processes can affect the reputation of an organization. 

Coding Tests

Organizations use third-party coding platforms for testing candidates as part of recruitment process.  Examples of such platforms include: HackerRank, Leetcode, Codility, Qualified, among others.  In many respects, use of such platforms in recruitment practice is counterproductive for several reasons, as stated below. 

• The problem statement is usually unclear and not defined in similar terms that would be practical for a business case
• Often the problem is defined in mathematical terms which is likely to confuse the candidate
• The testing environment is often buggy
• Tests are very localized and mundane
• Tests can drive bad practices
• Tests can reflect problems that candidate will never have to solve in practice
• Tests have incorrect test cases
• Tests are erratic
• Tests don't lend themselves very well to practical business use cases
• Tests ignore disabilities, social adjustments, and are counter to diversity, inclusion, and equity
• Tests have tedious edge cases and ambiguous logic
• Tests develop a sense of social distrust especially with experienced candidates
• Tests have questions that are not tailored to skills required for the job
• Candidates can pass even if they lack the necessary skills for the job
• Candidates who have a lot of practice on the platform can game the system
• Harder to code in an unfamiliar environment
• Tests can filter out good candidates leaving mediocre and average candidates
• Tests tend to be based on algorithmic skill rather than the ability to code
• Tests require time which can be defined as chargeable time especially if it requires developing a model
• Tests are often bookish in nature and rarely a reflection on a candidate's experience
• Tests can reset haphazardly in middle of a session
• Tests tend to be timed meaning they don't provide sufficient flexibility to candidates to fit into their busy schedules
• Tests can be done using Generative AI

Graph RAG

RAG

RAG

Graph RAG

Graph RAG Query