I'm down to an internal candidate vs. an external candidate for a role that is only one step up from entry-level.
I'm reviewing the "Performance Improvement through Effective Hiring" cast and got to the part where Mark says "9 times out of 10 I'll take the less-qualified internal candidate."
That helps! But I really really like this external candidate. She has the PERFECT temperament, aptitudes, and mindset for the role. (I've seen several different people in the role and I have a good feel for what characteristics it requires.)
The internal candidate has good Access skills and the director of his area has nothing but praise for him, but his temperament and aptitudes may not be quite as good a match.
Plus, it's only a matter of time before he'll be moving on -- he's studying electrical engineering. Whereas the external candidate, also still in school, is studing English Lit and Art History. My husband says, "She'll stay forever." (Sort of like I've done, with my impractical liberal arts degree. :wink: )
I understand that there's no guarantee of ANY given employee sticking around for any given amount of time. Does that mean I shouldn't factor that in at all? (I don't mean that to sound snippy, I'm really really looking for some insight.)
This is my first ever hiring decision so I may be overanalyzing, but I want to do good. :)