The problem comes when you have some specific requirements that need to be met. Many or maybe most organisations never seem to engage in strategic recruitment therefore they are always trying to fill a gap now!

It doesn’t seem to matter how many studies are done that shows the long term benefits no one ever gets the budget to hire above current requirements.

I think a lot is driven by the continual desire to achieve short term financial gains, whether that be for shareholder value, bonus schemes or just to keep the business afloat.

When I am on a panel, I use my influencing skills where appropriate to turn managers minds to potential to a point. If the technical skills are a critical requirement, we don’t hire on potential, but often we are able to spot the stars in the making and I will advocate on this point where I feel it is useful.

It’s never black and white and never should it be.

I also think that attitude is the ability to apply those skills elsewhere. This is rarely recognised by an employer because they are perhaps too focussed on getting a perfect technical skill match.

I’d take 90% less ability for 10% more attitude any day.

As for hiring on potential, I’ve been in the IT business for 30 years and while I have a large body of work behind me, employers are mostly interested in technology that is 10 years old or less. On the basis of simple mathematics, this means that two thirds of my experience doesn’t count.

By contrast, I have always worked in my own time to develop new skills in new technologies, I get better every year and I am now further away from reaching my limits than ever. If employers were genuinely interested in my potential I would be playing a whole new ball game. And yes, I would be quite happy to take a pay cut to work with anybody smart enough to recognise the real potential of their work force.

What actually is ‘potential’? I think this is where the problem starts.

To me ‘potential’ describes behavioural competencies (or transferable skills) rather than existing technical skills. Most organisations are hopeless at building a competency framework which does three things;

i) identifies the specific competencies required to be successful in that job, team and organisation
ii) identifies the current level of each employee’s relevant competencies, and
iii) has a clear plan to develop each employee’s competencies to the required level

Organisations who take these three steps are light years ahead of their competitors because they take a proactive approach to their employees’ ‘potential’. Organisations who do not take these steps will always be left guesssing about each employees’ ‘potential’ and as a result will almost always take the safe option and hire ‘previous experience’.

When I was first hired as a recruiter 21 years ago I had no recruitment skills at all but I did have ‘potential’ based on my specific behavioural competencies of Influencing, Persistence, and Achievement Drive.