We’ve all been there. Seen this. Read that.
_______________________________
Remember the “All is welll” night-watchman joke from the movie ‘3 Idiots’? The watchman was blind and had no idea about the whereabouts, but would keep shouting “All is well” at night. This gave so much solace and consolation to the society residents, that they would go to sleep unbothered, resting assured that they’re safe from thugs and all dangers. It’s only one day when the goons robbed some residents, did they realise the shenanigans of the watchman and took cognisance of the fact that he’s been visually impaired, all along.
This “looking for trainers with X+ years of experience” message gives me all the same feels. A Consolation prize.
Hear me out.
These kinda requisition forwards are a dime a dozen on the daily.
I’m always left so baffled after reading messages like these, and it instantly arouses so many questions for me!
> Does X+ years of work-exp really, truly warrant credibility?
> What’s it that that X+ years professional has, that someone >X won’t possess, with surety?
> Are we looking at experience, or are we looking for a strong pedigree and credibility?
> Are we implying that being of a certain age naturally guarantees all the skill suits required to do the desired job?
> Are we also trying to prove that by not being of a certain age, one is, by design, unfit for a job?
I understand that this is a filtration criteria, in search of the “heavily seasoned” players.
But then again, who (and what) defines this “seasoning”? Is the number of years worked enough to be considered “well seasoned?” Is exposure, talent, agility, and one’s ability to hold space in front of an audience of no importance? Or is it that having X+ years naturally warrants that these knitty-gritty and desired skill sets are a no-brainer?
Of course filtration is important. And of course this is not to undermine what an X+ or an X- trainer can bring to the table- and it’s not a competition by any means…
But the question here is, what exactly are you filtering here? If “desired competencies” or “capability” is what the recruiters are looking at; then shouldn’t the filtration criteria revolve around that instead of purely X+ years worked? Shouldn’t the questions or the requisites be about exposure in the said sector; overall exposure in the fraternity; methodology and approach; niche; so on and so forth?
What do you think?
“Looking for trainers with 20+ years of experience for….”
