The Cost of Not Training: Suzanne Lucas on Hiring and ATS Experience

In a recent LinkedIn post, Suzanne Lucas discusses the common and often costly practice of companies refusing to hire candidates solely because they lack experience with a specific applicant tracking system (ATS). Lucas highlights a cautionary tale shared by Bryan Creely, where a highly qualified candidate was rejected for not knowing a particular ATS, despite possessing all other necessary skills.

The Flawed Logic of ATS Exclusivity

Lucas argues that this hiring practice is fundamentally flawed and more expensive than investing in employee training. She points out the inherent inefficiency in continuously sourcing and interviewing candidates when the missing skill is often easily teachable.

“Y’all, don’t do this. Training on any ATS is cheaper than continuing to source and interview candidates.”

According to Lucas, the desire for candidates to “hit the ground running” is often overstated, especially when it pertains to learning commercially available software. She emphasizes that end-user proficiency in most software is not a significant barrier to entry.

The Ease of Learning New Software

In her analysis, Lucas posits that the ability to learn and adapt to new software is a fundamental skill that most professionals possess. The focus on a specific ATS, she suggests, overlooks the broader capacity of candidates to become proficient with the tools they need.

“Just about anyone can learn how to use just about any software designed for an end user.”

Furthermore, Lucas critiques the decision-making process behind software selection itself. If an ATS is perceived as overly complex or difficult to learn, she suggests the problem may lie with the purchasing decision rather than the candidate’s ability.

“And if it’s too super-de-duper complicated, then look in the mirror, and you’ll see a person who made a less-than-intelligent decision on what software to purchase.”

Rethinking Hiring Priorities

Lucas’s central argument is a call for companies to re-evaluate their hiring priorities. Instead of seeking candidates with hyper-specific technical skills on niche software, businesses should focus on core competencies and a candidate’s potential to learn and grow within the organization. Investing in training, she contends, offers a better return on investment than perpetuating a cycle of rejection based on minor, easily remedied skill gaps.

The insights shared by Suzanne Lucas underscore a critical point for hiring managers and HR professionals: the true cost of a hire involves more than just the candidate’s immediate skillset. It includes the ongoing expenses associated with recruitment and the potential lost productivity from prolonged vacancies, both of which can be mitigated by a willingness to train and develop talent.