Caption

“Years of experience” is the most bogus requirement on a job description. In Laszlo Bock’s book “Work Rules” he says that years of experience is 3% predictive of an employee’s performance in a role. From my HR and professional experience, I can confidently say: not all years of experience are created equal. We need to look at the QUALITY of that time spent. The rigor. The growth. It’s like two people saying that they swam every day for 3 years. When you look at the “resumes” of these 2 athletes you see: 🍊The first: swims 6 hours a day 🍊The second: swims 2 laps a day One is Michael Phelps, the other is my cousin. Despite their athleticism being tested every day, there is a clear better hire. Even weeks or months of Michael Phelps’s rigor would make him the better choice compared to my cousin’s “3 years of experience.” There is no comparison. Consider the QUALITY of someone’s experience. Do they check off the other boxes? That’s a hint that they should still be considered. Use years of experience as a data point. But don’t focus on it so narrowly. Have years of experience ever discouraged you from applying for a job? PS - Every situation is unique, so I created a free assessment to determine what is the #1 thing holding you back from getting more job offers. I’ll link it in my bio!