[Context: We’re looking at ways to refresh/update our methods of recruiting]
Opinion: Using only interviews as a method of assessing core contributors limits our ability to really understand the effectiveness and ability of potential candidates (especially in a non-traditional organisation like Status). We should have a more varied method of assessment that includes interviews, work samples, presentations (where appropriate), etc.
Proposal: Utilise bounties more as part of our recruiting process. Where possible, make the first stage of a recruiting proposal be “fulfil a bounty”. This would give us a real understanding of the candidate’s domain expertise in a remote setting, whilst also providing some small financial compensation to the candidate for the time spent. As such, the initial bounty would replace the traditional first interview. Based on the quality of work submitted, the person would be invited to continue.
A hiring process could look like this:
- Candidate applies for job.
- Candidates are pre-filtered by recruiting team (based on suitability), and successful candidates sent a link to our open bounties.
- Candidates submit proposals/fulfil bounties.
- The strongest submissions are then invited to meet members of the team for interviews, more assessment.
- Hiring decisions are made based on the information gathered from bounties, interviews, other assessments, etc.
Open question - feedback needed:
- For your role/team, would this have worked when you were hired?
- As a candidate, would you have liked this type of process?
- Is it possible to create a bounty for every type of work that Core Contributors do at Status?
- What are the limitations/challenges of bounties that may prevent this from working?