OP ED | Power is Contextual
When I analyzed the power and privilege I held as a brown woman in Canada vs. India, I was quite surprised.
Surabhi Jain
HIRING | Innovative Interviewing
In my last article, I talked about why I created a job description unlike any that exists today. Today, I will share insights from the interviewing process following the job posting.
I had nearly 100 individuals apply for the job I posted on LinkedIn. Out of these applicants, about 70 followed my instructions. Out of those 70 candidates, I narrowed down and interviewed 13 individuals. Not all 13 were a perfect fit, but all had something to offer. I scheduled a one-hour interview with all 13 individuals. They were sent a detailed email with who they will be meeting with, the themes we would be talking about, and the structure of the interview.
I offered themes for the interviews rather than specific questions because I wanted to keep the interview conversational versus a question/answer round. Utilizing this "themes" strategy worked really well. It allowed me to dig deeper into the applicants experience with respect to issues that the Funder Collaborative worked on. I was also able to assess their critical thinking skills in terms of how they responded and consider any follow-up questions they had. I tested whether they could be a thought partner for me (a key requirement for the job) and how they related their past experience to the current situation. It also helped the candidates reveal their true self, not be anxious, connect the past to the future, and get an opportunity to guide the conversation.
Interviews were scheduled for 60 minutes and broken into two chunks of 30 minutes. In the first 30 minutes, a colleague and I interviewed the applicant, and the second 30-minute block allowed the applicant to interview us, asking any questions that they may have. Each applicant received a list of themes/topics we would be talking about ahead of time. This was done intentionally.
Often, interviewees only get 10 minutes at the end of an interview to ask questions, and that is not enough time for them to get to know the organization, the position, and/or the interviewer. I didn't want this time constraint, so I provided them with the same amount of time as me to ask their questions. It helped me to assess whether they were serious about the job and evaluate the kind of questions they had. Could I be a thought partner to them? I wanted to demonstrate this two-way reciprocity - that they needed to know me as much as I needed to know them. The only way to do this was by being equitable, fair and transparent.
Some candidates used their full 30 minutes, and others only had 10 minutes' worth of questions. It didn't really matter to me whether they used up their full 30 minutes or not. What mattered was that they had equal amount of time as me and didn't feel the power imbalance that often exists between an interviewer and an interviewee.
At the end of the 13 interviews, only two individuals moved to a final interview. This was intentional as well. I didn't want more candidates in the final round because the first round had provided me with a good sense of who I could/would work well with, and who was not a good fit. The two strongest candidates advanced to having a discussion with me about their work styles, determining if they had any hesitations about the job, and answering any outstanding questions they had. The second interview was also scheduled for 60 minutes, broken into two chunks of 30-minutes each. I sent both the candidates the questions that I would be asking ahead of time so they knew what the focus of the interview would be and could prepare.
At the end, I made an offer to the candidate that had the strongest complementary skills to me, that demonstrated a high degree of critical thinking, and possessed an understanding of systems change and equity - the two main pillars of our work at the Funder Collaborative.
Next week: Feedback or Not?
Surabhi Jain is the Executive Director of Toronto's Workforce Funder Collaborative. She brings over two decades of experience in the social impact sector working to advance access to education and jobs for marginalized communities in the US and Canada. As a founder of a women's leadership fellowship, Surabhi brings together white, black, indigenous, and other women of colour to share their lived experiences around systemic inequities like race, gender, patriarchy. Additionally, as a consultative coach, Surabhi works with individuals and organizations to embed equity and inclusion in their work that leads to tangible changes and fosters a more inclusive environment. To connect with Surabhi, visit www.powerXprivilege.com.
HIRING | Feedback or Not?
In the first two articles of this series, I shared how and why I created a transparent job description and interview process that was different than "normal" social sector hiring processes. This article reflects on whether it was worth offering all the candidates an opportunity to receive feedback.
You may remember from my first article that all rejected candidates were offered an opportunity to schedule a 15-minute session with me where I would share feedback on their resume or interviewing process or just brainstorm where some other opportunities may exist for them.
Out of 70 applicants, I had about 25-30 individuals schedule feedback calls with me. The only catch to scheduling these calls was that the earliest I could provide feedback was in January and some of them received rejection emails in October. The reason was that I had decided to take time off in December to rejuvenate after a busy hiring period. As such, my availability in November to provide feedback was limited. (This was clearly mentioned in an email to all rejected candidates.) As soon as individuals received my feedback email, they started scheduling calls in January. Before long, my second and third week of January was filled with 15-minute feedback call calendar invites. At first, I was surprised that so many people wanted feedback but then, was also happy that I could connect and learn more about their accomplishments and what they hoped to do.
Fast forward to January when I realized that the individuals who had scheduled the calls were not joining them. When it happened the first few times, I sent follow-up emails to see if they needed to reschedule or had a challenge connecting. But I didn't hear back from them. Slowly, this became a pattern. Out of every five or six calls scheduled for the day, only one person would show up. As January ended, I had spoken with only four people out of the 25-30 calls that were scheduled. Less than 20% of the original applicants. This got me asking why so many would schedule calls and then not show? Here's my hypothesis:
- In the moment, it's exciting to be offered feedback on your resume/interviewing skills. But by the time you have to actually show up for the feedback (a few months later in this case), the excitement had worn off.
- People don't really care to receive feedback three months after they submitted an application. They likely moved on and found a job. The feedback wouldn't have helped them.
- People forget or they don't look at their calendar. Or, even if they do—they can't remember why they scheduled the meeting in the first place.
Next time, if I decide to offer feedback, I will make sure it is offered in a more timely manner and perhaps send reminder emails a week ahead of time to make sure people are still interested in the feedback.
Surabhi Jain is the Executive Director of Toronto's Workforce Funder Collaborative. She brings over two decades of experience in the social impact sector working to advance access to education and jobs for marginalized communities in the US and Canada. As a founder of a women's leadership fellowship, Surabhi brings together white, black, indigenous, and other women of colour to share their lived experiences around systemic inequities like race, gender, patriarchy. Additionally, as a consultative coach, Surabhi works with individuals and organizations to embed equity and inclusion in their work that leads to tangible changes and fosters a more inclusive environment. To connect with Surabhi, visit www.powerXprivilege.com.
HIRING | The Job Description That Went Viral
Writing a job description isn't easy. Writing a good job description is even harder. When I needed to hire someone last Fall, I looked online to find inspiration. But instead of finding inspiration, I was left disheartened. That is when I decided to go against the norm and write the job description that I would have wanted if I was in the job market 12-15 years ago.
Here are the key things my job description focused on:
Transparency: I knew I wanted the job description to be fully transparent about the work, expectations, salary and benefits, and what it was to work with me. As a small team (only 2 members) it was important to make sure the new hire knew what they were walking into. There was no hidden agenda. No jargon. Just honest details to ensure the right fit.
Clarity: As a small team, we often have to wear multiple hats and I was getting confused what I needed this person to do (vs. me). Up until this point, (the last four years) I had done everything. I knew I needed to clearly identify what this person's role was going to be and what my duties were.
Skills: Instead of focusing on qualifications, I focused on the skills I needed this person to have. I matched skills with the job functions and noted what percentage of their time would be spent in each area.
Skills over resume: Instead of asking for resumes, I decided to have the applicants answer a set of five questions and gave them three pages to do so. By not asking for resumes at the initial stage, I was able to eliminate any bias that comes with reviewing resumes. I was able to test if the applicant followed instructions, had critical thinking skills, and their quality of writing. In addition, it gave applicants the opportunity to demonstrate their experience and talk about their past work in relation to the job description.
Equity: I ensured that the job description and interview process was equity-focused. I detailed the hiring process with timelines. I also made sure that each rejected candidate received an email from me and an opportunity to chat for 15-minutes to get feedback, if they chose to do so.
Not only was the job posting straightforward with no hidden agenda, it also made sure I knew what I was looking for. The clarity with which it was written ensured that I could focus on hiring the right person for the job—someone who would complement my skills and not duplicate them.
By creating a job description and a hiring process unlike the norm in today's world, I was able to get over 100 applications by only posting them once on LinkedIn. The post was shared over 120 times and had over 70,000 people look at it.
Next week: Innovative interviewing.
Surabhi Jain is the Executive Director of Toronto's Workforce Funder Collaborative. She brings over two decades of experience in the social impact sector, working to advance access to education and jobs for marginalized communities in the US and Canada. As a founder of a women's leadership fellowship, Surabhi brings together white, black, indigenous, and other women of colour to share their lived experiences around systemic inequities like race, gender, and patriarchy. Additionally, as a consultative coach, Surabhi works with individuals and organizations to embed equity and inclusion in their work that leads to tangible changes and fosters a more inclusive environment. To connect with Surabhi, visit www.powerXprivilege.com.