There are typically two ways for organisations of running hiring rounds: deadlined, in which job applications are no longer processed after a publicised date, and rolling in which the organisation will keep allowing submissions until they’ve found someone they want.
The upside of a deadline is both to an applicant that they know they’re not wasting their time on a job that’s 99% assigned, and to the organisation, which doesn’t have to delay giving an answer to an adequate candidate on the grounds that a potentially better one submits when you’re most of the way through the hiring process, and incentivises people to apply slightly earlier than they would have.
The downsides are basically the complement. The individual doesn’t get to go for a job that they’ve just missed and would be really suited to, and the org doesn’t get to see as large a pool of applicants.
It occurred to me that an org might be able to get some of the best of both by explicitly giving a mostly-deadline, after which they will explicitly downweight new applications. So if you see the mostly-deadline in time, you’re still incentivised to get your application in by the date given, and if it’s passed you should rationally apply if and only if you think there’s a good chance you’re an exceptional fit..
Suggested hiring practice tweak
There are typically two ways for organisations of running hiring rounds: deadlined, in which job applications are no longer processed after a publicised date, and rolling in which the organisation will keep allowing submissions until they’ve found someone they want.
The upside of a deadline is both to an applicant that they know they’re not wasting their time on a job that’s 99% assigned, and to the organisation, which doesn’t have to delay giving an answer to an adequate candidate on the grounds that a potentially better one submits when you’re most of the way through the hiring process, and incentivises people to apply slightly earlier than they would have.
The downsides are basically the complement. The individual doesn’t get to go for a job that they’ve just missed and would be really suited to, and the org doesn’t get to see as large a pool of applicants.
It occurred to me that an org might be able to get some of the best of both by explicitly giving a mostly-deadline, after which they will explicitly downweight new applications. So if you see the mostly-deadline in time, you’re still incentivised to get your application in by the date given, and if it’s passed you should rationally apply if and only if you think there’s a good chance you’re an exceptional fit..