gh-lyndonkl-claude/skills/abstraction-concrete-examples/resources/examples/hiring-process.md

# Abstraction Ladder Example: Hiring Process

## Topic: Building an Effective Hiring Process

## Overview
This ladder demonstrates how abstract hiring principles translate into concrete interview procedures. Built bottom-up from actual hiring experiences.

## Abstraction Levels

### Level 5 (Most Concrete): Specific Example
**Tuesday interview for Senior Engineer position:**

- 9:00 AM: Recruiter sends calendar invite with Zoom link
- 10:00 AM: 45-min technical interview
  - Candidate shares screen
  - Interviewer asks: "Design a URL shortening service"
  - Candidate discusses for 30 min while drawing architecture
  - 10 min for candidate questions
  - Interviewer fills scorecard: System Design=4/5, Communication=5/5
- 11:00 AM: Candidate receives thank-you email
- 11:30 AM: Interviewer submits scores in Greenhouse ATS
- Week later: Debrief meeting reviews 6 scorecards, makes hire/no-hire decision

**Specific scoreboard criteria:**
- Problem solving: 1-5 scale
- Communication: 1-5 scale
- Culture fit: 1-5 scale
- Technical depth: 1-5 scale
- Bar raiser must approve (score ≥4 average)

### Level 4: Implementation Pattern
**Structured interview loop with standardized evaluation**

Process:
1. Phone screen (30 min) - basic qualification
2. Take-home assignment (2-4 hours) - practical skills
3. Onsite loop (4-5 hours):
   - Technical interview #1: System design
   - Technical interview #2: Coding
   - Behavioral interview: Past experience
   - Hiring manager: Role fit & vision alignment
   - Optional: Team member lunch (informal)
4. Debrief within 48 hours
5. Reference checks for strong candidates
6. Offer or rejection with feedback

Each interviewer:
- Uses structured scorecard
- Submits written feedback within 24 hours
- Rates on consistent rubric
- Provides hire/no-hire recommendation

### Level 3: Approach & Method
**Use structured interviews with job-relevant assessments and multiple evaluators**

Key practices:
- Define role requirements before interviews
- Create standardized questions for each competency
- Train interviewers on bias and evaluation
- Use panel of diverse interviewers
- Evaluate on job-specific skills, not proxies
- Aggregate independent ratings before discussion
- Check references to validate assessments
- Provide candidate feedback regardless of outcome

### Level 2: Framework & Research
**Apply evidence-based hiring practices to reduce bias and improve predictive validity**

Research-backed principles:
- Structured interviews outperform unstructured (Schmidt & Hunter meta-analysis)
- Work samples better predict performance than credentials
- Multiple independent evaluators reduce individual bias
- Job analysis identifies actual success criteria
- Standardization enables fair comparisons
- Cognitive diversity in hiring panels improves decisions

Standards to follow:
- EEOC guidelines for non-discrimination
- GDPR/privacy compliance for candidate data
- Industry best practices (e.g., SHRM)

### Level 1 (Most Abstract): Universal Principle
**"Hiring should identify candidates most likely to succeed while treating all applicants fairly and respectfully"**

Core values:
- Meritocracy: Select based on ability to do the job
- Equity: Provide equal opportunity regardless of background
- Predictive validity: Assessments should predict actual job performance
- Candidate experience: Treat people with dignity
- Continuous improvement: Learn from outcomes to refine process

This applies beyond hiring to any selection process: admissions, promotions, awards, grants, etc.

## Connections & Transitions

**L5 → L4**: The specific Tuesday interview exemplifies the structured interview loop approach. Each element (scorecard, timing, Greenhouse submission) reflects the systematic pattern.

**L4 → L3**: The structured loop implements the principle of using job-relevant assessments with multiple evaluators. The 48-hour debrief and standardized scorecards are concrete applications of standardization.

**L3 → L2**: Structured interviews and work samples are the practical application of "evidence-based hiring practices" from I/O psychology research.

**L2 → L1**: Evidence-based practices are how we operationalize the abstract values of merit, equity, and predictive validity.

## Edge Cases & Boundary Testing

### Case 1: Candidate has unconventional background
- **Abstract principle (L1)**: Hire based on merit and ability
- **Standard process (L4)**: Looking for "5+ years experience with React"
- **Edge case**: Candidate has 2 years React but exceptional work sample and adjacent skills
- **Tension**: Strict requirements vs. actual capability
- **Resolution**: Requirements are proxy for skills; assess skills directly through work sample

### Case 2: All interviewers are available except one
- **Abstract principle (L1)**: Multiple evaluators reduce bias
- **Standard process (L3)**: Panel of diverse interviewers
- **Edge case**: Only senior engineers available this week, no product manager
- **Tension**: Speed vs. diverse perspectives
- **Resolution**: Delay one week to get proper panel, or explicitly note missing perspective in decision

### Case 3: Internal referral from CEO
- **Abstract principle (L1)**: Treat all applicants fairly
- **Standard process (L4)**: All candidates go through same loop
- **Edge case**: CEO's referral puts pressure to hire
- **Tension**: Political dynamics vs. process integrity
- **Resolution**: Use same process but ensure bar raiser is involved; separate "good referral" from "strong candidate"

### Case 4: Candidate requests accommodation
- **Abstract principle (L1)**: Treat people with dignity and respect
- **Standard process (L4)**: 45-min technical interview with live coding
- **Edge case**: Candidate has dyslexia, requests written questions in advance
- **Tension**: Standardization vs. accessibility
- **Resolution**: Accommodation maintains what we're testing (problem-solving) while removing irrelevant barrier (reading speed). Provide questions 30 min before; maintain time limit.

## Applications

This ladder is useful for:

**For hiring managers:**
- Design new interview process grounded in principles
- Explain to candidates why process is structured this way
- Train new interviewers on the "why" behind each step

**For executives:**
- Understand ROI of structured hiring (L1-L2)
- Make resource decisions (time investment in L4-L5)

**For candidates:**
- Understand what to expect and why
- See how specific interview ties to broader goals

**For process improvement:**
- Identify where implementation (L5) drifts from principles (L1)
- Test if new tools/techniques align with evidence base (L2)

## Gaps & Assumptions

**Assumptions:**
- Hiring for full-time employee role (not contractor/intern)
- Mid-size tech company context (not 10-person startup or Fortune 500)
- White-collar knowledge work (not frontline/manual labor)
- North American legal/cultural context
- Sufficient candidate volume to justify structure

**Gaps:**
- Doesn't address compensation negotiation
- Doesn't detail sourcing/recruiting before application
- Doesn't specify onboarding after hire
- Limited discussion of diversity/inclusion initiatives
- Doesn't address remote vs. in-person trade-offs
- No mention of employer branding

**What changes at different scales:**
- **Startup (10 people)**: Might skip structured scorecards (everyone knows everyone)
- **Enterprise (10,000 people)**: Might add compliance reviews, more stakeholders
- **High-volume hiring**: Might add automated screening, assessment centers

**What changes in different domains:**
- **Trades/manual labor**: Work samples would be actual task performance
- **Creative roles**: Portfolio review more important than interviews
- **Executive roles**: Board involvement, longer timeline, reference checks crucial

## Lessons Learned

**Principle that held up:**
The core idea (L1) of "fair and predictive" remains true even when implementation (L5) varies wildly by context.

**Principle that required nuance:**
"Multiple evaluators" (L3) assumes independence. In practice, first interviewer's opinion can bias later interviewers. Solution: collect ratings before debrief discussion.

**Missing level:**
Could add L2.5 for company-specific values ("hire for culture add, not culture fit"). Shows how universal principles get customized before becoming process.

**Alternative ladder:**
Could build parallel ladder for "candidate experience" that shows how to treat applicants well. Would share L1 but diverge at L2-L5 with different practices (clear communication, timely feedback, etc.).