November 14, 2014: The Value of Experience

This is part 3 of  a 7-part series on the hiring process.

Let's take a moment to think about John.  John barely finished college, but he got a good degree when he did so.  He got his start in an entry-level position, and was trouble from the moment he walked in the door.  He complained a lot, did not follow through on his commitments, and he seemed to have started looking for a new place of employment the moment he walked in the door.  His performance when he was being productive was great; it was the intangibles that he lacked.  In about a year, it was clear to him that his supervisor was not enamored of him any more, and he made good on his threat to find another job.

The next place John landed found a similar situation.  John had a little experience, which was good, but his personal behavior was still less than optimal.  After 2 years, this position ended in the same way.

John goes looking for his 3rd position.  He meets all of your requirements: a degree in cupcake theory and evolution, 3 years of experience using that degree at competitor companies.  By the qualifications benchmark, he is an instant and perfect fit.  He interviews well: he is smart, charming, competent.

You have no idea about his poor work history, and no way of finding out.  How much value do you put on his work experience?

In many cases, a hiring manager will lean heavily on industry experience.  Most of my involvement in hiring has come in the way of hiring individual contributors.  After making dozens of hiring decisions and noting how they worked out, my experience tells me that work experience makes very little difference.  Here's why.

1) Just because another company made a decision to hire someone doesn't mean I should accept their decision.  They may have made a bad hiring decision.  Or the candidate could have been the prior manager's nephew.  The simple fact that someone was employed before is not in itself a qualification.
2) No matter how skilled the candidate, there will be a learning curve as she adjusts to a new company, new customers, and the new company's specific business processes.  This learning curve may be shortened by someone with relevant experience, but not eliminated.
3) For the right candidate, investing a year in training can pay off hugely.  Do I want an experienced person who has a 3-month learning curve but a 1-year career ceiling?  Or do I want someone fresh with a 1-year learning curve and a 10-year career ceiling?  For almost every hiring need I have seen, the individual with a 10-year career ceiling is the better bet.

Is experience important?  Sure.  Someone who has done a specific job for a long period of time is probably competent at that job.  Experience, however, is just a starting place.  The individual will come into your company with a set amount of it.  The individual has her entire career ahead of her, though.  Most of her experience will come as part of your company, and certainly her experience in your company is going to be more relevant and helpful than her experience somewhere else.

Evaluating experience, however, must come with an evaluation of the individual's future potential and contribution.  I will gladly hire someone with high potential and little experience over someone with high experience and little potential for growth.  I don't recommend this for every hiring situation that every manager will ever see.  It is important, however, that all hiring managers put proper value on potential vs experience.  Whatever you choose will have a lasting impact on your company.