On Mar 13, 2009, at 6:49 AM, dave malouf wrote:
I'm not sure there is a single "white paper" or FAQ that is going
to take care of all the variables that come to mind. I do like what
Jared suggested, but I'm still thinking that it relies on some
ability to know what it takes to make a product "easy to use" (ugh!
as if that is the goal).
We help non-design-savvy execs with this *all* the time.
The first thing we do is get them to describe, in terms of their
product, what an "easy to use" experience would be like. We don't ask
them to design it, just describe the frustrations they think users are
currently experiencing and how they'd aspire to eliminate them.
I would say is create a fairly generic ad for the type of person you
are looking for.
With all due respect, I'd say this is exactly the wrong thing to do.
We advise our clients to make a very *specific* ad that describes the
*accomplishments* that we'd want the new person to achieve. (Note, we
*don't* describe the experience or background of the candidate -- the
accomplishments should imply those directly.)
For example, we'd start the ad with "In the next year, you would..."
and then list 4 to 5 specific projects that they'd work on and how
we'd tell if they succeeded. A sample might be "create the interface
for a subscription-based service that helps our customers feel loved,
while delivering excellent service."
Then (without getting into the argument on the value
of portfolios) I would look at portfolios. I would specifically look
for/at portfolios that convey the story of the type of person I'm
looking for. If indeed "making easier" is what you are looking for,
I would look for portfolios of people who demonstrate a change from X
Y that proves that Y is better than X and the methods they used to
do it.
Ideally, in Scott's specific situation of a exec who isn't design-
savvy doing the hiring (and probably the managing), they want to look
at candidates who have done the things you need done before.
The stories of the portfolios or the presentations of those
portfolios will actually help you reflect on the story that you are
hoping to engage and as that story gets more solid through this
process you can hone your own job description a bit more.
Reviewing a portfolio to determine if the candidate is capable is very
hard for someone who doesn't know design well enough to abstract the
how-relevant-is-that-to-my-needs problem. Getting close to comparable
projects makes that problem go away substantially.
When these execs look at portfolios, if they don't have a solid design
background, they can very easily be swayed by pretty and not by
capable to solve the problems. That's where they get themselves into
big trouble.
So, we work hard to focus purely on those candidates who have
demonstrated comparable work to the stated objectives. It results in
many more successful, long-term hires.
In doing this work though, unfortunately, is time consuming and
difficult to farm out b/c you need to hear the stories. So giving
this to a recruiter to do for you wouldn't make much sense.
In general -- not specific to design hires -- hiring members of your
team is the #1 job of any manager. Make the right hire and you'll be a
star. Make the wrong hire and you'll pay for it for an eternity.
Handing off any hire to a recruiter, in my mind, is a huge mistake.
They might be able to source candidates for you, but, beyond that, you
should be doing the heavy lifting in all instances.
Jared
Jared M. Spool
User Interface Engineering
510 Turnpike St., Suite 102, North Andover, MA 01845
e: [email protected] p: +1 978 327 5561
http://uie.com Blog: http://uie.com/brainsparks Twitter: jmspool
UIE Web App Summit, 4/19-4/22: http://webappsummit.com
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... [email protected]
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
