At least, people should say that the field is bottlenecked on highly skilled generalists.
Thoughts on how to do this as a hiring manager? Things Iâve considered:
Title the role âSenior [whatever].â I think this is ok, but in many fields âseniorâ is a synonym for âoldâ, so this title causes talented young people to not apply (and untalented old people to apply).
Say âif you can do X, then you should applyâ. This is ideal, but itâs often hard to give an objective enough test that it doesnât end up just effectively being a test of the candidateâs self-confidence.
Say âif you have done X, then you should applyâ. Easier to evaluate objectively than (2), but artificially limits the candidate pool to only people who have done something very similar before.
Literally say âhighly skilled generalist.â Seems kind of pretentious, and it also seems like itâs effectively a self-confidence test for the candidate.
Ask for referrals from people who I know well enough that I can effectively say âhighly skilled generalistâ and they will apply that criterion in a way that I would endorse. This is good but means I donât hire from outside my circle.
Title the role âSenior [whatever].â I think this is ok, but in many fields âseniorâ is a synonym for âoldâ, so this title causes talented young people to not apply (and untalented old people to apply).
Hi Ben_West!
Are you saying that people would read âseniorâ in a job description as meaning âolderâ rather than âmore experiencedâ? That strikes me as an interpretation more likely to come from someone who hasnât yet had much exposure to the professional workplace.
Why would using the word âseniorâ cause an untalented old person to apply?
Unfortunately, the use of âold peopleâ in this sentence seems to hint at ageism. What age do you consider old? Should old people not be allowed to apply to jobs? Can you elaborate on your reluctance to hire an âoldâ person? I went to an online session that BlueDot hosted not too long ago about generalists getting into AI safety and many people asking questions were convinced they were experiencing ageism. Iâm not saying they were correct but this sort of comment seems like they werenât mistaken.
Are you saying that people would read âseniorâ in a job description as meaning âolderâ rather than âmore experiencedâ?
No, Iâm saying that they would interpret it to mean âhaving more years of formal experience (rather than e.g. having had a wider variety of experiences, or having had more useful experiences)â and I instead want a word which means âmore skilledâ.
Can you elaborate on your reluctance to hire an âoldâ person?
No reluctance! I check the â20+ years of experienceâ box on eag applications myself. I just am bemoaning the fact that the word âseniorâ indicates both age and skill, and I want a word which only applies to the latter.
Title the role âSenior [whatever].â I think this is ok, but in many fields âseniorâ is a synonym for âoldâ, so this title causes talented young people to not apply (and untalented old people to apply).
I think âspecialistâ works as a title in this situation, without invoking issues of ageâeg Finance specialist, Comms specialist etc.
For me TOR are important, and I wonder sometimes if enough time is spent by hiring organisations (including commercial organisations) in defining what they want out of roles. I see Chief of Staff roles in some organisations that are quite strategic, and in other organisations that are essentially an admin assistant. I appreciate defining responsibilities and tasks is especially tricky in startups, where the roles are harder to define, and you might want a true generalist who can do a bit of everything.
If an organisation advertises for a HR manager, and talks about how they are scaling up and rapidly recruiting, I might applyâIâve done end to end recruitment roles, performance management, HR policy etc. If the organisation advertises for a âHR specialistâ, and talks about recruitment, setting comp, HR compliance across multiple jurisdictions, Iâve got a better idea what theyâre looking for and Iâm going to screen myself out by not applying because I dont have all that expertise.
I dont think Iâm an âuntalented old personâ in the first scenarioâthe organisational asked for something that Iâve done before, so I apply based on the information that was available. But if the organisation asks for A but really intends B, then everyonesâ time has been wasted.
5. Ask for referrals from people who I know well enough that I can effectively say âhighly skilled generalistâ and they will apply that criterion in a way that I would endorse. This is good but means I donât hire from outside my circle.
If everyone hires from within their existing circles then the community doesnt growâitâs just musical chairs with the same people swapping between same organisations. If the thesis is that the community needs to grow to be able to (1) effectively respond to urgent AI safety challenges and (2) effectively absorb and use anticipated increased levels of funding, then to my mind looking at recruitment practices is an important part of the solution.
Thoughts on how to do this as a hiring manager? Things Iâve considered:
Title the role âSenior [whatever].â I think this is ok, but in many fields âseniorâ is a synonym for âoldâ, so this title causes talented young people to not apply (and untalented old people to apply).
Say âif you can do X, then you should applyâ. This is ideal, but itâs often hard to give an objective enough test that it doesnât end up just effectively being a test of the candidateâs self-confidence.
Say âif you have done X, then you should applyâ. Easier to evaluate objectively than (2), but artificially limits the candidate pool to only people who have done something very similar before.
Literally say âhighly skilled generalist.â Seems kind of pretentious, and it also seems like itâs effectively a self-confidence test for the candidate.
Ask for referrals from people who I know well enough that I can effectively say âhighly skilled generalistâ and they will apply that criterion in a way that I would endorse. This is good but means I donât hire from outside my circle.
Hi Ben_West!
Are you saying that people would read âseniorâ in a job description as meaning âolderâ rather than âmore experiencedâ? That strikes me as an interpretation more likely to come from someone who hasnât yet had much exposure to the professional workplace.
Why would using the word âseniorâ cause an untalented old person to apply?
Unfortunately, the use of âold peopleâ in this sentence seems to hint at ageism. What age do you consider old? Should old people not be allowed to apply to jobs? Can you elaborate on your reluctance to hire an âoldâ person? I went to an online session that BlueDot hosted not too long ago about generalists getting into AI safety and many people asking questions were convinced they were experiencing ageism. Iâm not saying they were correct but this sort of comment seems like they werenât mistaken.
Thanks for the questions!
No, Iâm saying that they would interpret it to mean âhaving more years of formal experience (rather than e.g. having had a wider variety of experiences, or having had more useful experiences)â and I instead want a word which means âmore skilledâ.
No reluctance! I check the â20+ years of experienceâ box on eag applications myself. I just am bemoaning the fact that the word âseniorâ indicates both age and skill, and I want a word which only applies to the latter.
Title the role âSenior [whatever].â I think this is ok, but in many fields âseniorâ is a synonym for âoldâ, so this title causes talented young people to not apply (and untalented old people to apply).
I think âspecialistâ works as a title in this situation, without invoking issues of ageâeg Finance specialist, Comms specialist etc.
For me TOR are important, and I wonder sometimes if enough time is spent by hiring organisations (including commercial organisations) in defining what they want out of roles. I see Chief of Staff roles in some organisations that are quite strategic, and in other organisations that are essentially an admin assistant. I appreciate defining responsibilities and tasks is especially tricky in startups, where the roles are harder to define, and you might want a true generalist who can do a bit of everything.
If an organisation advertises for a HR manager, and talks about how they are scaling up and rapidly recruiting, I might applyâIâve done end to end recruitment roles, performance management, HR policy etc. If the organisation advertises for a âHR specialistâ, and talks about recruitment, setting comp, HR compliance across multiple jurisdictions, Iâve got a better idea what theyâre looking for and Iâm going to screen myself out by not applying because I dont have all that expertise.
I dont think Iâm an âuntalented old personâ in the first scenarioâthe organisational asked for something that Iâve done before, so I apply based on the information that was available. But if the organisation asks for A but really intends B, then everyonesâ time has been wasted.
5. Ask for referrals from people who I know well enough that I can effectively say âhighly skilled generalistâ and they will apply that criterion in a way that I would endorse. This is good but means I donât hire from outside my circle.
If everyone hires from within their existing circles then the community doesnt growâitâs just musical chairs with the same people swapping between same organisations. If the thesis is that the community needs to grow to be able to (1) effectively respond to urgent AI safety challenges and (2) effectively absorb and use anticipated increased levels of funding, then to my mind looking at recruitment practices is an important part of the solution.