FY20-Q2 OKR Development: Hire to plan => 100%
We are looking to increase hiring by 14 people per month in Q2. That means we need to monitor our pipes and the process to get to hire (42 hires in total)
-
42 hires being made to plan (currently at 19 of 16 for Month of May, 16 of 12 for the month of June, 28 for the month of July) - breakout below is not up to date. => 100%, we decided to continue to hire past goal given sales performance. -
Development Hire 3 directors for the quarter (currently 1 of 3) => 33%, one hire backed out due to personal issue -
Dev: Hire to plan. 3 IC hires and 2 engineering managers made (Currently 12 of 5) => 100%, we decided to continue aggressively hire. -
CI/CD: Hire to plan. 6 hires made (Currently 7 of 6) => 100%, we decided to continue aggressively hire. -
Ops: Hire to plan. 5 hires made (Currently 12 of 6) => 100%, We decided to continue agressively hiring. -
Secure: Hire to plan. 5 hires made (Currently 8 of 5) => 100%, We decided to continue aggressively hire. -
Defend: Hire to plan. 4 hires made (Currently 2 of 4) => 50%, Due to a miscommunication, we effectively did not hire and will need to rebalance secure/defend. -
Growth: Hire to plan. 13 hires made (Currently 13 of 12) => 100%, We decided to continue to aggressively hire. -
Enablement: Hire to plan. 6 hires made. (Currently 7 of 6) => 100%, We decided to continue to aggressively hire.
Result: We elected to hire above our plan as we had some flexibility with both hiring months and financial plan. We hired 63 individuals this quarter. We know of one start that didn't occur (due to a family situation).
Good
- We were able to beat our hiring goals and keep growing successfully.
- Close collaboration with sourcing helped find several good candidates. None of these ended up closing due to a few unlucky reasons but overall it seemed to produce higher volumes of quality candidates than applicants.
Bad
- Some areas (Defend in particular) were not as effective in hiring. This was in part due to some miscommunication on Christopher's part.
- Lost several very promising candidates due to salary. Mostly this seemed to correlate to location factor being low in their area
Try
- To address defend problem we are having the secure team work to prioritize defend hiring.
- Possibly considering location factor increases across the US in the non-major tech cities. It seems to be a trend where I see someone in the US in a smaller city or town that is earning top tech salary working remotely. It seems that the location factor is more problematic hiring in the US due to the large range across the country than it is in other countries where people seem to find our offers reasonable.
Edited by Cynthia "Arty" Ng