# Thoughts on Hiring for a Great Team
source: https://developer.mastercard.com/blog/thoughts-on-hiring-for-a-great-team/index.md

Authors: Oran Cummins. I'm lucky, I get to work with some fantastic people on the Mastercard API team and across the teams we work with in Mastercard. Being responsible for APIs often involves re-thinking how we do business and automating tasks that previously were manual and labor intensive. So - are we in the business of putting folk out of jobs? Absolutely not, I see APIs unburdening humans from the mundane so we can spend more time thinking creatively about the art of the possible -- a far more appropriate task for our brains. That's why, while I obsess about scale through systematic integration and automation, I also obsess about the talented folk who define and build these platforms which ultimately free us from dull routine. Getting to a strong team means doing a lot of things -- having a vision that gets folk excited; creating a fair, inclusive, respectful working environment; empowerment, recognition etc. etc. Also, a major component for success is the hiring process. Attracting and selecting the right folk is getting progressively more difficult as demand for talent increases and that's the focus of this blog. Here's a few insights I've picked up after many years of hiring (mostly technical) talent... 1. The Job Specification The job spec should reflect the ethos, the culture of the company / team. Having once been a software developer, I used to be really turned off by any very prescriptive requirement (e.g. must have 'X' years' experience in technology 'Y'). Immediately, I'm questioning what sort of growth I'd achieve and whether my employer understands that I may have experience in comparable technologies, meaning I could very quickly get productive with technology 'Y'. As a tech employer, I prefer to be intentionally vague and broad about requirements so growth potential and ability to cross train is inferred. 2. The CV I read a lot from CVs, generally because when a CV doesn't read well, the candidate doesn't interview well. Invariably, strong software developer CVs have the following characteristics: Succinct, to the point with no redundancy (and no spelling mistakes!) Reader can quickly understand what sort of initiatives they worked on and how value was unlocked Reader can concretely understand how they contributed to individual initiatives If that's inherent in their CV and they've got ballpark the type of background you're looking for, then it's time to schedule an interview. 3. The Interview My method is simple -- no prescribed questions. Ask the candidate to talk about themselves and focus in on the work relevant to you that gets them excited. Everyone has blind spots so prescribed questions are not the best way to surface knowledge and ability. For some roles, I'm looking for folk who really appreciate application and implications whilst for others I'm looking for deep understanding. For deep understanding, the more you drill, the more excited the candidate should get -- they light up and see it as an opportunity to show off the depth of knowledge they've acquired. Those without that level of knowledge, want to quickly come up and talk to the high-level -- gasping for air. One point I'll make about technologists is that some may not interview well and you may have to be pro-active in extracting information. Sometimes when you go that extra mile, knowing you've got an introvert sitting in front of you, (or someone uncomfortable selling themselves -- a nice quality!), it can be very satisfying when a little bit of digging uncovers a great candidate. When you know you have a superstar candidate across the table (and sometimes that can be evident within the first 5 minutes of meeting) - remember that you have a highly sought after resource and you must move to sell your company; sell your team, sell the vision, sell the ambition, sell yourself. Sell, but not to the point where you misrepresent what the job is -- that would be dumb as you don't want to source a great employee who may not be interested in doing the job you need them to do. 4. The Team When assessing, I evaluate 50% on ability (experience etc.) and 50% on fit. As an example, you may need to balance creativity with execution -- if you have a team which already is strong on creativity but needs to be strengthened with more execution focus, then you want to bring in someone who's a bit more of a doer (of course, the opposite being true when you don't have enough creativity). The point being that you need to strongly factor in the profile of any team before you hire in a new member to ensure you have the right balance. Hiring isn't easy -- it requires time and energy and can be very frustrating at times. However, when you get it right -- there's an incalculable difference between a high performing team and an average (or worse) team. For me, I feel very lucky to work with great folk and thoughtful hiring is part of how I hope to keep it that way.