How to avoid using the wrong standards to recruit it talents?

Are you going to recruit an employee? You may have used the wrong standard. Now that the IT department is going to recruit some new members, it's time to consider how to hire the best and brightest talents. Although several years have passed, they can still choose carefully, but the manager in charge of recruitment seems to have forgotten how to choose excellent employees. We have all read the job description: "All the following requirements must be met, otherwise please don't apply, so as not to waste our time." Then, all kinds of necessary experiences are always listed in the same way, which makes even the most energetic and experienced experts shy away. Usually, these requirements consist of a long list of skills and qualities that are not fully considered and contradict each other. "You must have successful sales experience, have sold large-scale software solutions to senior managers and J2EE programmers, and have at least 25 years of working experience." Similar descriptions are common standards. I can imagine several junior staff who just graduated from college sitting in a windowless room sifting through piles of resumes. "Well, here's one. Well, I only have 24 years working experience in Java. Unqualified; Next. Steve Jobs, the name sounds familiar. Oh, I didn't finish college. Next. " I'm not implying: since the hiring manager has the opportunity, don't be too picky; But they should use these opportunities to make choices according to meaningful criteria. These selective attempts often seem to be based on some assumptions that lead to decision-making mistakes. Suppose 1: Past experience equals future success. The absurd selection criteria think that the applicant has done the same job before, which means that he will succeed in the future. But there are many problems in hiring people to reproduce their previous performance. People often work in exactly the same way as before, hoping to repeat the successful experience of the past, but not realizing the characteristics of the new environment. In fact, if someone has done a job before and achieved great success, it is impossible for him to reproduce this success. Early success will not inspire people to learn; Failure can provide a better lesson. Moreover, people will get tired of doing the same thing over and over again, and they will not fully devote themselves to their work. When recruiting, we should follow such a reasonable principle: "The expectation of past success implies the expectation of future success." The expectation of improving efficiency is more important and lasting than some special experiences. You will see this expectation in the process of increasing responsibilities, but in most cases it will be shown in the interview. Hypothesis 2: The hypothesis that specialization equals efficiency is deeply rooted in the business world. Since the scientific management research was carried out at the beginning of last century, people have always thought that specialization is the cornerstone of efficiency. The more professional a staff member is, the more efficient he will be. Obviously, in the past 100 years or so, this cognition has played a huge role, helping us to improve the efficiency of manual labor by more than 50%. But just because this hypothesis is proved to improve the efficiency of manual labor, it is not enough to show that it can also improve the labor efficiency of knowledge producers. A more reasonable view is that every organization and project needs to combine the ability of senior experts and knowledgeable generalists. Recruiting a group of experts will often lead to internal competition and opposition, but it will not improve production efficiency. In the right environment, people with different views will find the most effective and creative way to solve the problem at hand. Hypothesis 3: You can only do one thing well. Suppose we can only have one major skill. If someone is a mystery writer, he can't be a programmer. For me, one of the advantages of working in the IT field is that I can work with people of all kinds of talents. I have worked with people from all backgrounds. They used to be opera singers, concert pianists, high school teachers, mathematicians, physicists, historians, salesmen, factory workers and psychologists. They introduced various viewpoints of their respective industries, enriched our work experience and improved the quality of our technical products.