I wish more people got hired just for being decent people you want to have around instead of everything having to be about ROI all the time. One of my favorite coworkers is the local office manager. She's probably the "least important" by capitalist BS metrics but she's also one of the kindest people you'll ever meet. She makes me want to show up to work.
@faithisleaping I'd go a step further.

There's an argument to be made that companies should hire people who have particular desirable traits, and then train them up to fill roles or perform tasks as needed.

So you would, for example, recruit someone who is good at problem solving, critical thinking, and dealing with people, and then you'd train them to be a project manager.

Or you would recruit someone who is creative and artistic, and then train them to be your graphic designer or marketer.

So instead of hiring people with particular skills to fill particular roles, you'd instead hire people with desirable traits and then train them to fill roles as needed.

@aj @faithisleaping

I absolutely agree - however, I've kind of hit the other end, where I'm now locked out because "not the right guy".

The approach has a flip side: if the role becomes vacant and someone from outside turns up with all the tickets, it's harder for them because they're not yet mates.

It's a crushing loop: too skilled / not skilled enough / hmm not quite a fit could probably be but we know [person] over there.

Doubly weird as a field scientist, who has to have every skill..

@aj @faithisleaping

**I don't have *every skill*. A ... broad array ... is necessary for traversing between shipping manifests and writing papers and inducting people into power tool usage and writing for grants and living in close company with a lot of other people for weeks on end.

The useful summary might be: I totally agree that hiring practice should look for more creativity and flexibility. Be more creative and flexible,