Candidate used in a sentence

Candidate in a sentence as a noun

That's great, but we're not a rails shop and the candidate is brand spanking new to this.

Maybe there's an encoding problem with one of the candidate names this year.

What we've learned is to think a lot about what's good for the candidate about the roles we hire for.

" How about first you make sure your "alternative" candidate doesn't think we should nuke Mecca?

" Maybe someone else from Y says "candidate Z was great, everyone turned to them for advice.

Don't kid yourself about how much it matters that a candidate wants to go bar hopping with you after work.

If a hiring process weeds out some qualified candidates, it doesn't mean it's broken.

But the candidates we've hired lately compare extremely well to our earlier teams!

There is absolutely zero reason why HR/recruiting people should have final say on a candidate.

They also irritate candidates and set up weird incentives.

Now new candidates from Y generate an email to X with the standard "You worked at Y when candidate Z did etc etc.

Your goal is to come up with a process that balances time spent by the interviewer with finding a suitable candidate.

It doesn't have to hold you back - your attitude has to convince a potential employer that your background makes you a great candidate, not a worse one.

You set up qualification barriers for great candidates.

Note that I didn't say accurately assessing each and every candidate.

Are you hiring candidates based on their technical credentials, or their hipster credentials?

He flew out to Chicago for a day every year to talk to prospective entry-level candidates.

To do so, either Romney has to all but disappear as a candidate or he has to do extremely well in the upcoming primaries.

Whether or not it's broken is determined by whether the company finds a suitable candidate, how long it takes and how expensive it is.

The Sunday test is as follows: if the candidate is in at the office alone on a Sunday afternoon, would you be more likely to come in and work with them?

You don't respect candidates who have experience outside of your specific technology stack6.

Go could be a good candidate, but without proper dynamic linking it cannot serve as a library callable from other languages either.

Huge props to her for making the leap from what must be a very comfortable Google and for the board for finding a stunning candidate to lead the revival of Yahoo.

If you weren't Google and didn't have this huge backlog of candidates, you might dig deeper to find out which one was the more accurate representation, but if you are Google you just move on.

The Caller ID test is equally important, and is as follows: if the candidate calls you on a Friday night and wants to spend time hanging out or working, are you more likely to pick up or let it ring to voicemail?

Jiminy Christmas, if you don't already know why you support your Senate and Congressional candidates and can't be bothered to go look up their positions on real issues, please stay the **** away from the voting booth.

" Now person X is still pissed off about how Y treated them and so they respond to all of those emails with "Yeah, candidate Z was a crappy engineer, everyone had to carry for them they never did anything useful.

The absolute cheapest benefit you can offer an employee is their title, and if they have a rational reason for wanting a better title, why on earth would you refuse to give up some title to get a good candidate on board?

By eschewing any and all candidate information sources other than the market leader professional social network, you get access to a pool of 80% of the candidates with minimal effort.

"Which is fine, if you're on one of the teams that likes to innovate, but I'd just suggest that there's probably a more neutral phrasing that might allow a candidate to respond "I prefer to use existing solutions to problems, and here's why".

You send emails to your users whenever they get a private message and you want to make it easy as possible for that user to reply because recruiters getting candidate engagement happens to be one of your key metrics.

It's important to remember that the ethics of poaching from another company have to be weighed against the best interests of candidates; refusing to talk to someone because they work for a friend's company is probably a fraught decision.

The idea here is to spend the most time with candidates who might potentially work out and wasting as little time as possible on those that probably won't;- the problem with these kinds of whiteboard coding problems is that the tendency is for interviewers to think the problem needs to be "hard".

Hard to know that employee X has said the same thing about every candidate that has come from Y, and if the committee sees two comments one positive and one negative and there isn't anyone on the committee who knows any different then how do you evaluate?The simplest solution if either has an equal probability of being the 'correct' assesment is that you pass on them because you can't know if you have bad data.

You hand off the candidate to 5 different people, the interview lasts all day, you require too many interviews before making an offer, you have puzzle questions, your interviewer is non-technical and has never used the technologies you're hiring for, you rely on agency recruiters, you and your co-founders aren't involved in hiring, you don't spend enough time on hiring, it takes weeks for you to get back to candidates, it takes days for you to make an offer, you forget about scheduled interviews, your people doing the interviews aren't at work the day candidates have scheduled to come in, you ask inappropriate questions during interviews, you lie to candidates during interviews, interviewing is combat and not collaborative3.