My first post on tools emphasized the importance of knowledge prior to acquisition. Part two consists of a rant cautioning against requiring experience with a specific tool when recruiting, hiring or building out a team. I’m frequently irritated by mid- and senior level job postings with restrictive and/or exclusionary technical skill requirements, such as the following:
- Marketing Data Analyst = Proficiency with Microsoft Power BI
- Demand Generation Manager = Two or more years experience with SalesForce
- Content Marketer = Ability to create high-quality presentations in Google Slides
- Communications Specialist = Working knowledge of Adobe Creative Suite (e.g., Illustrator, Photoshop, etc.)
Are the people hiring for these positions only willing to consider candidates who meet this criteria? If so, then…
- The resourceful data analyst who bootstrapped at a series of startups using Google Sheets and Apache OpenOffice Calc isn’t suited for the gig.
- The brilliant sales enablement manager who spent the last four years working with HubSpot at a top competitor gets overlooked.
- The creative content marketer who has 10+ years building decks in PowerPoint, KeyNote and Prezi has her resume round filed.
- The amazing artist with an enviable portfolio of work built with Affinity Designer & Photo does not apply.
Most often I don’t think this is the intent of hiring managers seeking legitimate talent. Granted there are short-term, project-based needs that do not afford the time for on-the-job learning. But when trying to attract the best and brightest for a long-term role within an organization, it would be wise to describe skill requirements in a manner reflective of that desire. And it doesn’t require much more in terms of effort or words:
- Experience with analytic and visualization tools such as PowerBI, Tableau, Looker, etc.
- Prior experience with CRM systems (SalesForce, HubSpot, Zoho or other)
- Ability to create high-quality presentations
- Demonstrated ability with illustration and photo editing applications, preferably Adobe Creative Suite
These changes may seem subtle, nuanced or perhaps even pointless, but I contend otherwise. It conveys a desire for individuals with deep functional knowledge rather than a LinkedIn skill badge for a particular brand name tool. My suggestion: before listing a specific tool in your requirements, evaluate it across four aspects (all starting with ‘P’ because most good marketing related frameworks incorporate alliteration):
Purpose – What is the primary reason your organization uses the tool? It may include a broad set of functionality, but at its core what does it enable or do?
- Displaying = Viewing of published content (e.g., Acrobat)
- Modifying = Editing of existing content (e.g., Photoshop)
- Transforming = Composition of existing content (e.g., After Effects)
- Generating = Creation of original content (e.g., Illustrator)
Many tools could be classified into more than one of these designations, but the further down the list you go the greater the creativity or domain knowledge required to realize its benefits. Thus probably better to describe the desired talent or capability you’re looking for rather than just the tool you associated with the work.
Proxy – What best describes competing tools available in the marketplace? If someone hasn’t used your tool, what best describes their user experience with an alternate?
- Equivalent = Similar overall with common features, functionality, terminology and a familiar user interface (e.g., Excel vs OpenOffice Calc)
- Different = Different user interface and features but familiar terms and functionality to achieve similar output (e.g., Tableau vs PowerBI)
- Divergent = Fundamentally different approach, terminology and/or user experience; akin to different languages (e.g., MS SQL vs Splunk SPL)
If alternate tools are largely equivalent, don’t bother denoting your specific tool as a requirement; instead refer to the tool category and list three reasonable alternatives as examples. However if you consider your tool divergent when compared to its alternates, then probably best to explicitly nam it in any position description or required skills list.
Path – What is the learning curve or ramp up period to become proficient with the tool?
- Easy = 80% of the core functionality can be learned in a few uses with minimal subsequent increase in productivity or quality over time
- Intermediate = Can learn core functionality and produce output in a few uses, but will benefit greatly from subsequent utilization
- Difficult = Multiple uses required to fully understand core functionality and/or output anything of significance
- Expert = Steep learning curve with lots of feature depth; requires foundational knowledge beyond tool
These are analogous to hiking trail designations and serve as a relative measurement of time and commitment required to be up and running if no prior experience. Again, the further down the list…the more justification for requiring experience with a specific tool.
Pertinence – To what extent does the tool contribute to a user’s overall job performance? That is, how dependent will an individual be on the tool to achieve perceived success within the organization?
- Desirable = Nice to have prior experience; utilization will be required and will benefit the individual but anything above basic competence won’t significantly enhance overall job performance
- Essential = Need prior experience; utilization will be required and job performance is somewhat dependent on how effectively the tool is used
- Vital = Extensive prior experience required; use of the tool is synonymous with performance of the job; you cannot succeed without effectively maximizing the capabilities of the tool
For this aspect I am borrowing from an approach used to classify critical MRO inventory. Whereas the first three Ps evaluated the tool from your perspective of the manager or leader, this last one evaluates the tool from the perspective of the applicant or future team member. If their future success depends heavily on using this tool (i.e., vital) then best to explicitly name it in the description or skill requirements.
Is such a framework overkill? Yeah, probably. But with so many digital marketing tools available today—I found one guy who reviewed 177 SEO tools—it is highly unlikely ANY of the applicants for your open marketing position have experience with ALL the ones you have chosen to use. So again, let’s step back from the specific tools for a moment and place greater emphasis on the knowledge and capabilities we desire.
