Experience Isn’t A Problem If You Know How To Determine ‘Fit’
During The Great Recession of 2008, the subprime mortgage catastrophe ushered in a housing apocalypse and devastating economic wake that left nearly 10.1% of Americans jobless. In a desperate attempt to find work, countless experienced, skilled, and recently let-go employees flooded hiring managers with resumes and applications for positions they were overqualified for.
From this surge of overqualified applicants, many theories emerged about how best to approach an imbalance between talent and role. Because of the reeling economy, the high unemployment rate, and the available talent’s pressing need for work of any kind, it was widely assumed that this was a bull market for companies that were hiring.
And yet, some experts urged businesses to use caution – including Peter Cappelli, Professor of Management at Wharton (University of Pennsylvania). He cited numerous potential pitfalls that hiring overqualified candidates presented. Cappelli claimed that “because so many people need jobs and are desperate, they are much more likely to apply for positions for which they aren’t completely suited and also for ones for which they aren’t completely interested.”
While it is understandably attractive to consider hiring someone whose superior skills might be obtained at a discounted rate, Cappelli’s advice aligned with the prevailing wisdom, which is “to keep in mind that there is always a risk to hiring overqualified candidates.”
A Philosophical Shift
Today, the job market couldn’t be any more different from the one during The Great Recession. Currently, there are somewhere between 1.5 to 1.9 open positions for every employable worker in the US. This means the pendulum of labor market power swings in dramatic fashion from the employer to the employee courtesy of The Great Resignation.
The Great Resignation and subsequent Great Reshuffle of 2022 came about, in large part, due to the existential crisis workers faced during the COVID-19 pandemic. With newly found time to think about life and work, many seemed to conclude that the traditional career path of grinding their way to the top no longer seemed appealing. Instead of seeking a better job title, many began seeking a better life beyond, not because of, their work.
This seismic cultural shift in the way people view work has created one strange similarity to the events hiring managers faced in 2010: an influx of overqualified workers looking for new employment opportunities.
Strange Paradox
Regarding the peculiarity of both a market with not enough (2010), and too much (2022) available work, leading to an influx of overqualified workers seeking jobs, the question remains: what do hiring managers do with an overqualified candidate?
Is it still best to heed the advice of Cappelli or is it time to reexamine the conventional approach under current conditions? What hasn’t changed between 2010 and 2022 is that companies want skilled and talented candidates ready to meet the challenges and opportunities they face.
The crux in this situation is that the skills and talents of potential candidates must fall into the Goldilocks Zone of not being either over or under-experienced, but ‘just right’. Otherwise, red flags go up in the minds of hiring managers. Not enough experience could mean that candidates are incapable of fulfilling the job requirements. However, too much experience could lead to Cappelli’s warnings that they’ll leave when a better offer comes along, get bored and disengage, or be a problem for the team.
What needs to be understood to uncover a solution begins by investigating what is different between 2010 and today. First, in 2010, workers were desperate and willing to take any position available because jobs were scarce. Today, available positions are in abundance. It is the choice, not the necessity, of individuals to determine where and how they want to work.
Second, the philosophical shift in how people see their job’s place in the grand mosaic of their life has changed. The traditional path of chasing promotions, money, and more responsibility has been relegated to a thing of the past. Many workers today are instead seeking greater work-life balance and company cultures that embrace it. They are willing to trade money for less stress, fewer hours, and greater opportunity to pursue passions beyond work.
Third, hiring managers who are using sweeping generalizations about overqualified applicants being problematic – and therefore dismissing them entirely – are letting old and calcified ideas cost their organization the kind of talent they might direly need.
To rectify the ‘overqualified’ problem, it must first be redefined – not as a problem, but a dramatic cultural shift. The dismissal of overqualified candidates is a symptom of a larger issue – a flawed candidate evaluation process.
Moving Forward
Determining who to hire is an extremely complex undertaking at the best of times. Doing it well requires a systematic selection process that can: 1) articulate what it takes to succeed in the job, 2) be an asset to the organization long-term, and 3) reach beyond assumptions about ‘overqualified’ candidates potential vs their actual risks.
To evaluate a candidate effectively, hiring managers must be able to uncover and clearly articulate what it takes to be successful in the role. Amy Phillip of Career Certain and a member of Forbes Coaches Council reminds us that, yes “candidates can be overqualified, bringing more experience and more advanced skills than the position requires. Hiring managers should dig deep to understand what’s driving a candidate to accept a role with less responsibility or compensation to mitigate risk.”
However, risk mitigation in the hiring process, especially when considering ‘overqualified’ candidates, shouldn’t be made based on assumptions. Studies on hiring success and workplace performance show that preconceived notions about candidates’ experience based on their resume alone prove unhelpful 70% of the time. In other words, we are usually wrong.
A thorough process, one that accounts accurately for the risks involved, doesn’t rely on assumptions, generalizations, or leave us susceptible to biases. Instead, it focuses on the crucial areas that determine fit for the position that will lead to long-term success. They combine:
- Skills / Knowledge / Abilities: What the candidate can do.
- Attributes: The candidate’s work style, habits, and tendencies.
- Desires: The candidates motivations for the role, or their career.
An effective hiring process will reveal any incongruities in the potential fit of a candidate for the role – thus mitigating much of the risk involved in hiring. It also uncovers the driving factors that determine potential for success of candidates who have an abundance of qualifications.
When it is a good fit, there are significant rewards an organization can gain from a candidate with a wealth of experience.
“Hiring overqualified candidates can help you achieve much higher productivity, growth, and opportunities that you may not even be thinking about pursuing right now,” says Claudio Fernández-Aráoz, a senior adviser at Egon Zehnder International and the author of Great People Decisions. He concludes, “there are more benefits to hiring an overqualified employee than there are risks.”
Risks in hiring an overqualified candidate don’t come from the candidate: they come from a hiring process unable to accurately determine the best fit. Cappelli agrees that for all candidates, it is essential to “establish clear criteria for all jobs” and “stick to it when matching candidates to criteria.” That eliminates risk while positioning organizations to take advantage of the ‘overqualified’ candidates who are currently seeking new career trajectories.
Bottom line: By designing a plan for success for our positions, deriving hiring requirements from that plan, and a structured interview process, we can maximize opportunities for our team and for “overqualified” candidates.
