Hiring decisions

[HT_USMC]

I disagree with all the "new blood equates to new ideas" line of thinking. This guy (the current employee) may already have ideas of how to do things better, quicker but in his current position hasn't been able to effect that change for whatever reason.

Should you not hire from within, you may get a guy who on paper looked good but didn't work out. In the process you end up losing the current employee because he figures it's a dead end street. So worst case scenario you might end up looking for two newbies in the future.

Also, how does the current employee ever get the experience to compete with the candidates that could be hired from outside? I'm a firm believer in giving people their shot.

 

[MET]

If you are a good Manager and believe in your self, promote with in your department. You are there to help and teach a good employee who will also be loyal.

 

[Mr Bogus]

I will be patient.... I am really friggen curious however... it will take a couple months to figure out if the choice was right or not.. (heck both guys could fails or successes)

I want to know the reasoning behind the choice though you can update us in 6 months as to the outcome



one thing I did not see mentioned above anywhere was the "turn over rate" of the company... I think that could influence my choice a bit..

What I mean is if the company has a very low rate, that could be indicative of the primary hiring process and could reflect well on the "in house" guy right? maybe?