Most job applicants expect that the job description in the advertisements will match the position that may be filled. However, ours a recently published study examining startup hiring shows that this is not all the time the case. Sometimes the position someone is applying for may not be the same position they were hired for.
The job may evolve from the moment the hiring decision is made to the recruitment process itself. Hiring managers may change job responsibilities, hire someone for a different position than the one they are applying for, or hand over the job search altogether. While this could be frustrating for job seekers, employers are doing it in response to uncertainty in the workplace.
When employers have difficulty finding employees AND many people make profession changesknowing and understanding why this happens is crucial each for those looking for a latest job and for those attempting to fill some of the many vacant positions.
Why jobs change between posting and hiring
As a part of our startup hiring study, we interviewed over 100 founders, managers and their employees, job seekers and experts from the startup community. We analyzed interviews to know how and why workplaces modified over this era, and found two important patterns.
We’ve found that some employers intentionally use the recruitment process to know their organization’s needs and define latest positions accordingly. In these cases, employers know they should hire someone, but they do not yet have a clear idea of what the job will appear like.
(Shutterstock)
One startup in our study used its recruiting process to define two latest marketing positions. Instead of writing and publishing a formal job description, the founders scoured their networks and brought in two candidates from the marketing industry for a non-traditional evaluation process.
The founders described their current marketing challenges and asked job candidates to present their solutions. Based on the presentation, they designed two different marketing positions regarding the skills of each candidates.
Unplanned job changes
In other cases, changes in job responsibilities are not a part of the planned process. Hiring managers may start with a clear description of the positions they need to fill, fail to search out candidates with the skills they are looking for, and find yourself redefining and re-posting those positions.
One CEO we spoke with did this after receiving an overwhelming variety of applications that exceeded the skill level needed to open a personal assistant position. He re-advertised the position of office manager, which required higher qualifications, and quickly filled it.
Some managers change their minds about what they need, including during the recruitment process.
One startup in our study identified problems in its sales function during the hiring process and ultimately modified jobs after applications arrived. He offered one candidate – who had applied for the original full-time sales manager position – a latest job as a lead generator. He was promised that he would eventually take the sales position he had applied for.
Finally, managers sometimes come across great candidates who are a good fit for various positions and find yourself filling those positions as an alternative. One startup in our study went to a job fair hoping to search out a mid-level developer and ended up hiring an entry-level developer and a CMO.
Positive and negative effects
We have found that the evolution of job descriptions during the recruitment process can have mixed consequences for each the hiring organizations themselves and for latest employees.
Some changes, akin to abolishing jobs and re-locating them, can result in positive consequences, akin to more stable work and the retention of officials in organizations. It can allow organizations to learn, create a higher organizational structure, and even take on a latest job.
This finding is consistent with past research found that changes to job descriptions can allow organizations to adapt to different situations by developing structures and strategies that are tailored to the circumstances.
(Shutterstock)
However, we observed that almost all of the other sorts of job changes included in our study had negative consequences, akin to job instability, prolonged conflict over job territory, and incumbent departure and termination.
For example, the previously mentioned job applicant who was offered a job aside from the one he applied for got here into conflict with the sales director and was never transferred to the full-time sales job he was promised when hired. He left inside a 12 months and his position was not filled.
This finding is consistent with past research showed that changing jobs around individuals may end up in bias, favoritism, low morale, and undesirable and unpredictable power struggles.
Employment inequality
The dynamic nature of job descriptions can create inequality in the hiring process because not all job candidates understand that job titles may change between posting and hiring. Those who understand will have a distinct advantage over those that do not because they know how one can apply for a job even if their preferences and qualifications do not match the job commercial. This knowledge can be tailored to specific demographic groups.
This may be particularly detrimental to women and members of other underrepresented groups who feel less comfortable applying for jobs that do not match their qualifications. Previous evidence has shown this women often apply for positions for which they are already qualified while men apply for jobs for which they need to qualify.
Women may also apply for jobs less regularly than men, expecting the position to evolve to suit their skills and preferences. If more women are aware of the results of our study, it could result in more women applying for positions that appear to be outside their area of expertise.