So basically, recognise that you are employing human beings rather than machines, and treat potential candidates with respect rather than going for obviously one-sided positions that good candidates are going to see right through? It's a little sad that this isn't just common sense, isn't it?<p>What I don't understand is how nearly universal bad employment conditions seem to be. I can understand businesses wanting to maximise the benefit from investing in hiring staff. However, all the evidence I have ever seen shows that sustaining long hours is counter-productive, supporting a good work-life balance keeps happier and ultimately more effective staff, etc. The big improvements in productivity I've seen have all been at companies that have dramatically <i>improved</i> their staff's working conditions, for example by experimenting with shorter working weeks, complete flexi-time, allowing off-site working by default, etc.<p>How is it that even large companies with dedicated HR departments, training for managers, etc. still seem to push in the opposite direction? I suppose good working conditions, particularly those based on flexibility, are always open to abuse, but surely staff who are going to take advantage regardless will just find other ways to do so if you judge them by bum-on-seat metrics. Meanwhile, I wonder how many people take advantage of employers in some way mainly because they consider the deal to be abusively one-sided otherwise, and how many good people never get hired in the first place because they wouldn't work under those conditions...
Ooh can I play too?!<p>* Don't require 10 years experience with a language or technology that less than 10 years old
* Don't list hundreds of unrelated skills required because you're hoping this position will do the work of 5 employees and 2 consultants.
* Don't mention "self-motivator". Who would describe themselves otherwise?
* Don't call the position a "Director of" when it has no direct reports, no hiring budget, and itself reports to an intern in marketing.
* Don't ask how many ping pong balls would fit in a school bus unless your business is directly related to filling buses with ping pong balls.
Another thing I like to see is when the posting talks about what sort of projects you'll be working on.<p>The latest example of this was GazeHawk's job posting:<p><i>"Eye tracking gives you a ton of data with a lot of dimensions. We want to show that data to our users in a way that's easy to parse. That means interactivity: HTML5, Canvas, JS."</i><p>Just a single sentence, but it engaged me, got me thinking, and gave me a good idea of the sort of projects they're working on.
<i>Don't look like a recruitment agency</i> - Absolutely. Even when my job search was in its most desperate throes, I was reluctant to apply for any job that wasn't straight-forward about who they were or what they did.<p><i>Guarantee a response</i> - I don't think a guarantee is all that necessary, but a timetable for the process is always nice. Along those same lines, I always greatly preferred postings that had an email address, even better if it's a person's. But really, just something that indicates an active, rather than passive process. Filling out a form and hitting submit just has a hopeless, waiting-at-the-dmv feel to it.
I usually avoid anything that has the word "rockstar" or similar wording. To me, it implies unrealistic expectations of knowledge and/or performance.<p>I will also avoid anything that has a long list of prerequisites. If there's more than maybe five or so disparate technologies requiring multiple platform knowledge, then the job you're offering should probably pay double what you're offering.
How about listing requirements that are actually requirements? If you don't need 7+ years Mirah experience, don't ask for it. I never apply for jobs that I don't actually fit the 'requirements'.<p>Every time I see someone ask for more experience than is possible for a language, I wonder what other lies they're going to tell me or unreasonable things they are going to expect.
The problem is that a lot of these suggestions are very superficial and don't consider the underlying reason companies are doing what they currently do.<p>For example if you specify a salary you end up anchoring the negotiations, if a candidate is not quite up to the level you're looking for but you want to hire them anyway, the candidate is much less likely to accept a job offer where you offer a salary below what you stated in the ads, even if they would have accepted it otherwise.<p>Furthermore you need to consider the impact disclosing salary levels has on current employees, if the market is tough you may have to offer a salary above what current employees are earning, which can be very damaging to morale and can make your staff feel hostile towards the new hire from the start.
When I post job ads now, I ask interns for their blog URL, websites they've done, URLs to open-source projects, and their Twitter account if any. I'm not looking to find out personal stuff, but I want examples of what they do, how they learn, and if they'll be a fit for us.<p>When I used to just ask for a cover letter and resume, 99% of the people who interviewed with me were just awful. Now I tend to get good dev interns who want to be here and have similar drive and ambitions.<p>I'm not saying that a person who doesn't have any OSS experience, a blog, or a Twitter account wouldn't be a good developer, but then if they're not interested in OSS, teaching, doing things on their own (outside of work/schoolwork) or sharing, then they may not be a good cultural fit.
I would add as a couple of other tips:<p>1. Provide a contact email, esp. for larger companies, filling out a n page submission form is a killer.<p>2. Use LinkedIn and the other boards not headhunters, Dice and Monster feel like headhunter spam. At least with LinkedIn you can connect from a posting, to a company to an HR person.<p>Personally I would love it if Dice had a filter headhunter option, but it probably would kill their #1 revenue stream.
"Hirelite is on a mission to put headhunters out of business. We host speed interviewing events using video chat where 20 job seekers talk to 20 companies for 5 minutes each..."<p>Hey, what an awesome idea!
Wow, this looks like the exact opposite type of person I'm looking for when I hire.<p>I'm willing to pay high wages and even stake in the company, but if I do, that person should be willing to work hard and be dedicated to the building quality projects, rather than clocking in and out.<p>Is this how all developers feel? Do they all expect remote work?<p>I understand the need for working from home, but as a business builder, I like being able to sit with a developer and plan and build together.
These are generally really excellent points. I'll just quibble with a few:<p>* Say that you're comfortable with remote work<p>Uh, excuse me but don't say that unless you <i>know</i> how to make a remote situation work for someone. I would say instead, "be open to someone relocating but make clear whether you'll pay for that or not". Ads saying "local candidate only" are really obnoxious (what, does the person needs a California passport or something?)<p>Further, a lot of this advice is along the lines of "be an absolutely fabulous employer". And while I like the idea of employers becoming the absolute best, on the way to that ideal they'll still be hiring employees. So really, I want an ad that's going to reflect the real pluses and minuses of a less than perfect employer. For example, don't say 40 hours a week unless you mean it, etc.
So do companies prefer it when candidates apply to them directly, or does that just irritate them (ie. If they've used agencies/headhunters to advertise their vacancies)?
I think this list doesn't go far enough.<p>Minimum salary should be $300k per year. Guaranteed zero overtime, and you get to spend 25 of your 30 work hours per week on side projects or learning new languages (from home, of course.)<p>Anything else is just oppressive and restricts creativity. If you say otherwise you're probably just a lame business guy who hates hackers.