Doesn’t it save everyone’s time to provide salary range in the first round of communications?

The Importance of Transparency: Why Salary Range Disclosure in Initial Job Communications Matters

In today’s competitive job market, efficiency and transparency are more critical than ever—for both employers and candidates. One recurring concern among job applicants is the lack of upfront salary information during early conversations with potential employers. Many candidates question: Why isn’t the salary range shared at the initial stages of communication? Would providing this information save everyone time and streamline the hiring process?

The Candidate’s Perspective: Avoiding Unnecessary Time Investment

As a job seeker, spending multiple rounds—sometimes three to ten interviews—without clarity on compensation can be frustrating and inefficient. It often leads to candidates investing significant effort and emotional energy into a process that may ultimately become unproductive if the final salary figures do not meet their expectations. Recognizing that salaries can vary based on experience and skill level, many candidates prefer at least a preliminary salary range to assess whether continuing with the process is worthwhile.

The Employer’s Dilemma: Reasons Behind Withholding Salary Information

Employers and recruiters might have several reasons for not sharing salary details upfront. Some believe that revealing compensation too early could dissuade candidates or lead to negotiations that favor the candidate initially. Others might consider salary information to be sensitive or proprietary, fearing it could influence internal equity or competitiveness.

Is it Rude or Reasonable to Request Salary Details Early On?

From a candidate’s standpoint, requesting salary ranges at the outset isn’t necessarily rude; it’s a practical step toward transparency and efficiency. Sending a polite message such as, “Could you please provide the salary range for this role?” helps set clear expectations and allows both parties to evaluate whether to proceed further. In an era where job searching often involves multiple applications and interviews, upfront clarity can prevent unnecessary time expenditure for everyone involved.

The Modern Job Market: Transparency as a Best Practice

In 2023, the landscape of hiring continues to evolve. Candidates are increasingly valuing transparency and want role details, including compensation, early in the process. Employers who share clear salary information not only enhance their credibility but also attract candidates who are genuinely interested and better suited for the role.

Conclusion

Providing a salary range early in the recruitment process benefits all parties. It minimizes wasted effort, aligns expectations, and fosters a culture of transparency. Employers are encouraged to consider sharing salary details upfront—to respect candidates’ time and to streamline their hiring efforts—and candidates should feel empowered to ask for this information without hesitation. In the end, honest communication is the foundation of an efficient and respectful hiring experience for everyone involved.

Company is backdooring me… How can I bust them?

How to Detect if Your Company is Undermining Your Recruitment Efforts

In today’s competitive job market, recruiters often face challenges beyond sourcing qualified candidates. One concerning issue is the possibility of a company undermining the recruitment process—specifically, bypassing recruiters to hire candidates directly or using other tactics to evade proper collaboration and compensation. If you suspect your organization is engaging in such practices, it’s essential to understand how to identify and address these concerns professionally.

Recognizing Signs of Potential Backdoor Hiring

A pattern of sudden candidate disengagement can be highly indicative of underlying issues. For example, if a series of highly responsive, communicative candidates cease responding after interviews with the hiring manager, it raises questions. While candidate dropout rates can vary, a consistent trend involving multiple individuals warrants closer scrutiny.

In some cases, candidates may reveal insights that suggest hiring decisions are being made off the record. For instance, a candidate might disclose that the company advised them to communicate directly with hiring managers, bypassing recruiters entirely. Such disclosures can indicate that the organization prefers to hire informally or outside established processes, possibly to avoid recruiter fees.

Strategies for Uncovering Undermining Tactics

If you suspect that your company is engaging in backdoor hiring practices, consider the following approaches ethically and professionally:

1. Monitor Candidate Communications
   Pay attention to candidate feedback and disclosures during interviews or informal conversations. Candidates may hint at bypassing recruiters or share details about internal processes that defy standard procedures.

2. Leverage Social Media and Professional Networks
   Social platforms like LinkedIn can provide valuable insights. Keep an eye out for updates or posts from candidates indicating they have received job offers or are in the process of transitioning. Changes in their employment status or public posts mentioning new roles can signal successful placements outside your purview.

3. Analyze Candidate Response Patterns
   Track the response rates and engagement levels of candidates you’ve sourced. Sudden drops in communication may suggest they have accepted offers elsewhere or are being directly recruited outside your involvement.

4. Communicate Internally
   Engage with hiring managers and HR teams to clarify processes and ensure transparency. Establish procedures that discourage direct candidate contact outside of the recruiting team, reducing opportunities for bypassing.

Maintaining Ethical and Professional Boundaries

While it’s natural to want to safeguard your efforts, always operate within ethical boundaries. Avoid invasive or questionable tactics such as unauthorized social media stalking or data collection. Instead, focus on building transparent relationships within your organization and leveraging available channels for insights.

Moving Forward

Detecting and preventing backdoor hiring requires a combination of vigilance, professionalism, and clear communication. Developing robust recruitment processes, fostering transparency, and maintaining a strong ethical stance will help ensure that your efforts are recognized and appropriately compensated. If you continue to face challenges, consider discussing concerns with organizational leadership or exploring formal avenues for addressing potential misconduct.

Summary:
– Watch for patterns of candidate disengagement after interviews.
– Obtain insights through candid discussions and social media monitoring.
– Foster internal communication to strengthen recruitment processes.
– Maintain ethical boundaries while investigating suspicions.

Ensuring integrity in recruitment is vital for building a reputable and efficient hiring process. Staying alert and proactive will help you safeguard your role and the organization’s best interests.

The “new” assessment my CEO wants me to start giving candidates. Am I insane for thinking this is bullshit?

Evaluating the Latest Hiring Assessment: Is It Ethical and Effective?

In the ever-evolving landscape of talent acquisition, organizations continually seek innovative methods to identify the best candidates for their teams. Recently, I encountered a new (or rather, not-so-new) assessment tool that has sparked considerable debate within my professional circle. Its origins trace back nearly two decades, and it appears to have seen little to no updates since then.

Understanding the Assessment Tool

This particular evaluation involves candidates completing a four-page ranking exercise. The content of this exercise asks them to rate a series of highly contentious and ethically provocative concepts—such as murder, torture, slavery, and executing heretics—on a scale. The purpose of this exercise is to generate a comprehensive, ten-page personality report. This report offers an in-depth analysis of the candidate’s personality traits and work style, with a notably intense focus on negative indicators.

Concerns About the Assessment’s Approach

According to the company leadership, the assessment is designed to weigh negative traits significantly more than positive qualities. Consequently, the resulting profile tends to emphasize perceived red flags—traits that might suggest risks or problematic tendencies—rather than highlighting the candidate’s strengths or potential contributions.

This approach raises several concerns from an ethical and practical standpoint. Is it appropriate to evaluate individuals based on responses that include ranking concepts such as violence or oppression? Moreover, how does this method align with fair hiring practices and the principles of respectful candidate engagement?

Seeking Perspectives and Best Practices

Has anyone here had experience with similar assessments? Do such tools serve a meaningful purpose in the hiring process, or do they risk undermining candidate dignity and perpetuating biased judgments?

In my view, while innovative assessments can provide insights, they must be employed judiciously, ensuring they respect ethical standards and contribute positively to talent decision-making. As professionals dedicated to fair and effective hiring, it’s vital to scrutinize the validity and morality of the tools we use.

Conclusion

The debate around this assessment underscores the importance of critical evaluation of hiring methodologies. Candidates should be assessed based on relevant skills, behaviors, and potential—rather than through provocative or potentially harmful theoretical exercises. I welcome your thoughts and experiences on similar assessment tools and how we can best balance innovation with integrity in the hiring process.

Had a perfect candidate lined up for it to all blow up this morning

Navigating Recruitment Challenges: When Candidate Engagement Takes an Unexpected Turn

In the world of talent acquisition, even the most promising candidate prospects can encounter unforeseen hurdles. Recently, I experienced a situation that underscored the importance of clear communication and competitive benefits packages—especially when attracting top-tier talent.

The Context

As an internal recruiter, I have been diligently working to fill a particularly challenging role. After several weeks of sourcing and screening, I identified a highly qualified candidate who seemed like an ideal fit. We moved swiftly through the process, and this candidate was offered the position earlier this morning.

An Unexpected Response

During our discussions, the candidate inquired about the company’s benefits and paid time off (PTO) policy. I relayed that the standard PTO was five days after the first year and increased to ten days after three years. Fortunately, we were able to accommodate the candidate’s request for ten days off to coincide with planned vacations, demonstrating our flexibility.

However, the conversation took an unexpected turn when the candidate requested to review the benefits package further and asked if they could defer their decision until Monday. My boss responded decisively, stating that an immediate decision was required and, ultimately, asked the candidate to leave the interview altogether.

Reflections and Insights

This incident left me feeling both frustrated and contemplative. The company’s PTO policy is notably less generous than industry standards, offering only five days early on and no immediate benefit for new hires, with no 401(k) match or other competitive perks. Despite my attempts to advocate for more attractive benefits, my concerns have not led to policy adjustments.

This experience highlights a crucial aspect of recruitment: competitive benefits are vital in attracting and retaining talented professionals. When policies fall short of market expectations, it can significantly limit the pool of qualified candidates and hinder overall hiring success.

Moving Forward

While setbacks like this are challenging, they also serve as valuable learning opportunities. To improve our prospects, I believe it’s essential to:

• Advocate for more competitive benefits packages that align with industry standards.

• Clearly communicate the value of the entire compensation package to prospective candidates.

• Foster an environment where candidates feel respected and valued, regardless of the immediate hiring outcome.

Conclusion

Recruitment is an ongoing process of adaptation and improvement. Situations that test our resolve remind us of the importance of offering compelling benefits and maintaining professionalism throughout the hiring journey. By continuously refining our approach, we can better position ourselves to attract the talent necessary for organizational success.

What do you guys think about this?

Reevaluating Perceptions of Recruiters: A Closer Look at Industry Stereotypes

In the world of talent acquisition, we’ve all encountered opinions and perceptions that paint recruiters with a broad brush—often labeling them as inefficient or disconnected from organizational needs. Recently, I came across a post expressing such sentiments, which prompted me to reflect on the underlying assumptions and the importance of a nuanced understanding of our profession.

The Myth of the “Ideal” Recruiter

The post in question seemed to suggest that recruiters are the architects of company hiring criteria, as if they arbitrarily set the standards that candidates must meet. This perspective overlooks the collaborative nature of the hiring process, where recruiters serve as intermediaries translating organizational requirements into actionable criteria. In reality, hiring standards are typically defined by the company’s leadership and HR policies, with recruiters facilitating the process rather than dictating it.

Industry Stereotypes and Their Impact

It’s worth noting that these kinds of comments sometimes originate from individuals within the recruiting community itself, aiming to distinguish themselves from negative stereotypes. While such efforts are understandable, they can inadvertently contribute to misconceptions about the profession. The reality is that every industry, including recruiting, has a diverse range of practitioners. Generalizations, whether positive or negative, often fail to capture this complexity.

The Importance of Constructive Dialogue

Rather than engaging in broad criticisms or defensive posturing, professionals should strive for a balanced view. Recognizing the challenges recruiters face and the constraints within which they operate can foster greater appreciation and collaboration. To improve the hiring landscape, we need open dialogues that acknowledge individual circumstances and systemic factors, rather than relying on simplified narratives.

Conclusion

In conclusion, perceptions of recruiters—like many stereotypes—are often overly simplistic and fail to reflect the full picture. By moving beyond reductive labels and fostering understanding, organizations and professionals can work together more effectively to attract and retain top talent. Let’s aim for constructive conversations that emphasize collaboration and continuous improvement in our hiring practices.

Explaining to candidates: range ≠ automatic max offer

Understanding Salary Ranges: Why Your Offer Isn’t Always the Maximum

When navigating the job market, one common misconception is that a salary range listed in a job posting guarantees you will receive the top of that range. For example, seeing a range like $120,000–$150,000 often leads candidates to assume they will be offered the maximum amount. However, this is not always the case.

What Do Salary Ranges Represent?

Salary ranges are primarily established with internal equity in mind. They serve as a guideline to ensure fair compensation across roles within a company, taking into account factors such as experience, skill level, and organizational pay structures. These ranges help HR teams maintain fairness and consistency while accommodating a variety of candidates.

Why Your Offer May Not Be the Top of the Range

Your final compensation package within that range is influenced by several key factors:

• Experience: Candidates with more extensive or specialized experience may negotiate toward the higher end.
• Skill Match: If your skills closely align with the role’s requirements and demonstrate immediate value, this can warrant a higher offer.
• Interview Performance: Strong interview performance, including demonstrating cultural fit and problem-solving abilities, can positively impact your offer.
• Internal Pay Equity: Companies often aim to keep their team’s compensation balanced to prevent disparities. If similar roles within the organization are already compensated at certain levels, offers tend to cluster around the midpoint of the range.

Exceptional Candidates May Receive Higher Offers

While most offers tend to be around the central point of the salary range to ensure fairness across the team, companies are open to exceeding this midpoint for exceptional fits — individuals who bring rare or highly valuable skills that significantly benefit the organization.

In Summary

A salary range provides a guideline rather than a promise of the final offer. It allows room for negotiation based on individual qualifications and organizational considerations. Candidates should understand that factors like experience, skills, and interview performance play crucial roles in determining the specific figure offered.

TL;DR: Salary ranges are flexible; your final offer depends on your experience, skills, interview results, and internal pay structures—not just the upper limit of the range.

AI recruiting is going nowhere

The Futility of AI in Modern Recruiting: A Critical Perspective

In recent years, the recruiting industry has experienced a surge of technological innovations, with artificial intelligence (AI) tools promising to revolutionize talent acquisition processes. These solutions often boast of rapid candidate sourcing, automated outreach, and intelligent summarization—all designed to streamline hiring. However, despite their promising pitch, many seasoned professionals in the field remain skeptical about the true efficacy of these AI-driven approaches.

A Veteran Recruiter’s Insight

With over 15 years of experience in corporate recruiting, I have observed firsthand the evolution of hiring tools and techniques. Unfortunately, the latest wave of AI recruiting products appears to be heading down a misguided path. For instance, a recent example involved a founder touting a “powerful sourcing tool” that, with a simple job description input, could generate hundreds of candidate profiles within seconds. It promised AI-generated summaries, resume reviews, outreach, and follow-ups—all delivered with the latest buzzwords.

Yet, beneath this shiny surface lie fundamental issues. The core challenge in recruiting has never been a lack of profiles to review. Adept recruiters can already identify numerous qualified candidates. The real obstacle is engaging the right talent—particularly passive candidates—without damaging your employer brand or turning off potential applicants.

Automation: Speed Without Substance

When tools intensify coverage and automate outreach, they tend to amplify bad recruitment practices. Instead of solving genuine recruitment hurdles, they often facilitate the dissemination of targeted spam—disguised behind more polished user interfaces. This approach devalues genuine engagement and worsens the candidate experience.

Candidate Engagement Is King

The true difficulty in hiring lies on the candidate side. Talented professionals are often passive—off the market quickly and not actively seeking opportunities. Engaging these individuals requires more than automated messages and generic outreach; it demands building trust and offering value based on ongoing relationships.

Platforms that dominate hiring—like LinkedIn or niche communities such as daily.dev—hold a better chance of success because they involve consistent interactions with candidates who already engage with their content and community. These platforms operate from a foundation of familiarity and trust, rather than cold outreach or indiscriminate messaging.

The Limitations of “More, Faster” and AI Outreach

Founders frequently promote ideas centered around “finding more candidates, faster,” and scaling outreach through AI. However, from my perspective, this approach is fundamentally flawed. Increasing volume and automating messages tend to diminish response rates—both for those employing such tactics and for the candidates being targeted.

This cycle leads to lower candidate trust, noisier inboxes, and employer brands that appear desperate or impersonal. It does not foster meaningful connections or improved hiring outcomes; instead, it perpetuates a cycle of generic, impersonal communication that ultimately harms the reputation of employers.

A Call for Thoughtful Innovation

My appeal to fellow entrepreneurs and innovators in the recruiting space is straightforward: if your primary solution involves simply “finding more people and hitting them harder,” it’s time to reconsider. Developing tools that prioritize trust, consent, and meaningful candidate engagement will serve the industry—and candidates—far better.

The future of recruiting does not lie in another AI-powered email blast disguised as innovation. Instead, it requires building platforms and processes rooted in genuine relationships, ongoing engagement, and respect for candidates’ time and preferences. Only then can we create a more effective, humane, and sustainable hiring ecosystem.

In summary, AI has a role in recruiting, but it should complement, not replace, authentic candidate relationships. The industry must pivot from volume-driven automation toward trust-centric approaches—because at the end of the day, hiring is about people, not algorithms.*

We really need to stop stigmatizing “job hopping” and just ask better questions during the interview process.

Rethinking the Stigma Around Job Hopping: A Call for Better Interview Practices

In today’s dynamic labor market, the practice of changing jobs frequently—commonly referred to as “job hopping”—often carries an unfair negative connotation. Having over a decade of experience managing teams and reviewing countless resumes, I’ve come to realize that this bias is rooted in outdated assumptions and fails to acknowledge the nuanced realities many professionals face. Instead of dismissing candidates based solely on previous job changes, hiring managers should ask more insightful questions during interviews to better understand a candidate’s motivations and potential fit.

Recognizing the Complexities Behind Career Moves

1. Toxic Work Environments and Mental Health Awareness
Workers today are increasingly prioritizing mental health and overall well-being. Remaining in a toxic or unsupportive environment for the sake of loyalty is no longer justified—especially when the stakes include personal health and happiness. Recognizing this shift is essential for evaluating a candidate’s employment history without prejudice.

2. The Impact of Organizational Changes
Frequent reorganizations, leadership transitions, and strategic pivots happen almost constantly within organizations. A company that originally hired someone for a specific role may see that role evolve dramatically following a restructuring. These changes can significantly alter job expectations, making early employment history less indicative of a candidate’s actual skills or dedication.

3. External Factors Accelerating Job Transitions Since 2019
The COVID-19 pandemic has profoundly affected the global workforce. Many professionals relocated, adapted to new working conditions, or faced layoffs due to economic shifts. These external pressures have prompted an unprecedented level of mobility, which should be viewed within context rather than as mere career instability.

4. Internal Mobility at Larger Companies vs. Small Firms
Employees at large corporations or consulting firms often switch roles, teams, or projects within the same organization. These moves are sometimes perceived as loyalty; however, they may just reflect strategic career development. Conversely, experience at smaller firms or startups—often marked by more frequent job changes—can be unfairly scrutinized, despite the valuable skills gained through such transitions.

5. Personal Life and Family Responsibilities
Life events such as family health issues, divorce, or caregiving commitments can significantly impact a professional’s career trajectory. These challenges often necessitate changes in employment or taking a step back temporarily, and should be understood as part of the broader human experience rather than career flaws.

The Value of Movement: Skill Growth and Talent Discovery

Many high performers actively seek new opportunities to broaden their skill sets or explore new initiatives. This curiosity, diversity of experience, and drive to grow are traits that can make such candidates invaluable. Companies that recognize and nurture this potential are likely to attract top talent and foster innovation.

Elevating the Interview Process

Rather than fixating on the number of jobs someone has held, interviewers should focus on understanding candidates’ motivations, aspirations, and resilience. Asking targeted questions about what inspires them, their long-term goals, and how they have navigated past challenges provides richer insights into their potential for long-term fit and contributions.

Conclusion

The conversation around job hopping needs to evolve. By moving beyond superficial judgments and adopting more thoughtful, context-aware interview strategies, organizations can better identify talented, motivated candidates. Embracing the full story behind a candidate’s work history not only fosters fairness but also unlocks access to a more diverse and skilled talent pool—ultimately driving greater organizational success.

Turned down an Amazon AWS Job Offer ($260k TC) … Here’s why

Why I Declined a $260,000 Amazon AWS Job Offer: A Reflection on Values and Expectations

Introduction

In today’s competitive job market, offers with substantial compensation packages often catch the eye. Recently, I was presented with a non-technical role at Amazon Web Services (AWS) that included a total compensation (TC) of $260,000—comprising a $155,000 base salary, stocks, and bonuses. As someone currently working in local government, the figure was astonishing and well beyond what I ever anticipated.

Initially, I verbally accepted the offer, agreeing to a six-month relocation timeline. However, shortly after, I received a call from the hiring manager that dramatically shifted the narrative. What unfolded served as a stark reminder that transparency, clarity, and alignment with company culture are just as vital as compensation.

The Turning Point

During the follow-up call, I was informed that the position I had applied for and interviewed for was no longer available in its original form. The scope of the role had changed significantly: the territory responsibilities, key performance indicators (KPIs), and core functions had all been altered. Moreover, the remote work arrangement shifted from a flexible schedule—originally communicated as one week per month—to an in-office requirement. Additionally, the company requested that I spend 50% of my time in the target market until I relocated, a stark difference from the initial expectations.

These sudden changes signaled a reorganization within AWS that affected the role I was offered, coupled with increased demands and decreased flexibility. It became apparent that the company’s priorities and expectations had shifted post-interview, leading to a fundamental disconnect.

Decision and Reflection

Given these developments, I made the decision to decline the offer, doing so within 15 minutes of the conversation. While turning down such a lucrative offer was not an easy choice, I prioritized aligning with organizations that value transparency, effective communication, and respect for their candidates’ time and commitments.

My reasoning is rooted in the belief that financial remuneration is only one facet of job satisfaction. If a company begins a recruitment process with certain promises and then reneges or alters the terms unexpectedly, it raises concerns about future stability and mutual respect. In this case, the experience underscored that if an employer is willing to make drastic changes at the offer stage, how might they behave once I’ve started?

Conclusion

Although I recognize the incredible opportunity that a $260,000 package represents, I am convinced that a positive, transparent work environment is equally, if not more, important. For others navigating similar decisions, my advice is to prioritize clarity and consistency from potential employers. Money can open doors, but it shouldn’t come at the expense of integrity and mutual understanding.

In the end, I believe that if I successfully navigated Amazon’s rigorous hiring process, I will find many other opportunities where my value is genuinely recognized and where expectations are clear from the outset. Choosing a company aligned with these principles is ultimately more rewarding than a hefty paycheck short-circuited by uncertainty and miscommunication.

Thank you for reading.

If I don’t ask, please don’t tell me.

The Power of Thoughtful Communication in Professional Settings

Effective communication is a cornerstone of successful professional interactions. Whether during job interviews, performance reviews, or casual workplace conversations, the way we share information significantly impacts perceptions and relationships. Clarity, relevance, and tact are essential components of meaningful dialogue.

Respecting Boundaries by Asking and Listening

When someone in a professional context invites you to share about yourself, it’s important to understand the intent behind the question. For instance, if an interviewer asks, “Tell me about yourself,” it’s best to focus on pertinent details such as your skills, experiences, and achievements that relate to the role. Sharing personal history, like multiple divorces, when not relevant, can detract from your professional qualifications and may inadvertently create discomfort.

Providing Relevant Experience Without Over-Detailing

Similarly, when asked about previous professional experience, it’s advantageous to present a concise overview highlighting positions, responsibilities, and accomplishments that demonstrate your suitability for the role. While transparency is valued, delving into exhaustive explanations about why you left past jobs—especially unprompted—can appear unnecessary or unfocused.

Sharing Motivations with Purpose and Positivity

When discussing why you’re interested in a particular position or company, framing your response positively and thoughtfully is more impactful than citing negative or trivial reasons. For example, saying “because I think it will be easy” may convey a lack of genuine enthusiasm or effort. Instead, expressing genuine interest in the company’s mission, culture, or opportunities for growth reflects a proactive and engaged attitude.

Conclusion

Cultivating effective communication involves understanding what to share, when to share it, and how to do so appropriately. By focusing on relevant, positive, and professional information, you foster clearer interactions and build stronger workplace relationships. Remember, sometimes, the most effective response is as simple as respecting boundaries and choosing your words with care.