In The Toolbox-Employee Selection Matrix

Although we don't tend to have a ton of turnover in the Technology Department where I work, we do have some, and we have even expanded our department size to include new positions. During those times, we've had a large number of people apply for the job that are underqualified--severely.

In an effort to skim those people out in an easy initial paper screening, I added a question to their application that asks them to rank their experience with a number of key technologies we use and also include the number of years they have worked with it.

I don't know if there is a truly easy way to accomplish this, but I also modified a matrix I once found to help rank the responses I received. The matrix takes the numbers you put in (in my case, taken from the potential employees' own responses) and weights them based on how important we consider the technologies at the time. It can be changed to include whatever items you want, and you can change the weights. In the Weighted Values column, I've added different formulas to determine the weight values.

I separated many of the columns and added a lot of description to ensure I can come back to this matrix in (hopefully not less than a few years) and know what I can change and how I can change it. The workbook has several sheets, one explains how to use the matrix, two separate pages for potential employee repsonse entries (10 employees per sheet, these can be copied to add more--or you can just include more on the same worksheet, I just like to work in smaller chunks), and also a page with my weighted values just for informational purposes.

How did I come up with the values? Well--that bit is certainly subjective, but if it was a CORE technology--such as a component of a Microsoft network--it was VERY important to me that applicants have a higher level of skill in it, so I only gave credit to answers of 4 or 5. For other technologies that may not have such an impact on our core functions, I spread out the weights a bit more and gave credit for less experience. The nice thing about this, though, was that I only had to come up with the matrix once and then use it as a comparison tool against multiple applicants rather than having to completely evaluate each candidate's application to a granular level.

And though this post is mostly geared to those who have to HIRE employees rather than those looking for a job, maybe job seekers reading this will help me in the future because they will avoid some of the pitfalls. Having now been on many hiring committees, I've learned a few things from this side, and I also have some perspective on pet peeves about things applicants do that I really didn't before. Making sure you completely fill out the application, correctly answer questions, and write a cover letter that REALLY tells me why you want to work here (and not a generic, re-used cover letter that--god forbid--you didn't even bother to change the name of the company you originally wrote it for) are all ways to get on my good side. Therefore, the opposite is true. Incomplete applications, failing to follow basic directions on a question (If you can't do that--I should trust you with my Network? I think not.) and reusing general cover letters that could theoretically be sent to any company--yes, especially when you fail to remove the name of the company you last sent it to--are all ways to get your application tossed in the reject pile.

Hopefully this workbook will help those of you trying to quickly rank and rate candidates for that first go-round. I absolutely know this worksheet can completely be improved upon. It can be very helpful as a starting place, though, to give you a relatively quick and unbiased ranking to cull out unqualified candidates.

The matrix for employee selection can be found under Resources on the District Tech Now site, here:

#employeeselectionmatrix #technicalhiringmatrix #districttechselectionmatrix #educationaltechemployeeselectionmatrix #technologyworkerskillmatrix