A cover letter is a test of a person's (or a friend's) writing ability.  The traditional hiring process is a test of whether people follow the rules and don't do anything new or creative or that shows initiative.  In industries where the number of applicants greatly exceeds the number of openings, it's also a test of endurance, humility, and frugality.  

Which of those characteristics will help your organization move ahead?  Do we think it helps us or job seekers when they burn through years of savings and endure rejection again and again?

Here's an alternative view that may not be accepted by many institutions, and certainly not most or all government-run institutions, but will work for innovative, progressive institutions.

Let's start by thinking about this differently.  Does an employee ever "fail," or did the institution or the manager or the hiring process fail?  The institution's goal in hiring someone is to be able to better fulfill their mission by developing and implementing strategies and tactics, ideally things that are new and more compelling, effective, or efficient.  And for the individual?  To maximize the intrinsic rewards from work--rewarding, challenging, satisfying work--and the monetary compensation that reflects the economic value they add.  

Figuring out the "fit" for the institution and the individual doesn't happen in an interview, but rather through working together.  This can take a few forms . . .

- An internship

- Volunteering

- A short contractual engagement

Where do you start when you have lots of people interested in an opening?  If you're looking for an outstanding employee who is a great fit for your institution, why not start with what they've done?  And why force them to put that into prose in the form of a cover letter?  Ask for links to their LinkedIn profile (with endorsements), their YouTube videos or channel, the presentations they've posted on SlideShare or documents on Scribd, their Twitter feed, their blog, or any of the many other ways we have to share our passions and accomplishments?  (A note on LinkedIn: I trust what's on LinkedIn far more than I trust what someone puts on their resume.  Why?  Their LinkedIn profile is out there for all their colleagues to see.  If they misrepresent themselves, their friends or colleagues will call them on it, or they'll have no recommendations.)

Then why not have some of the folks come in and spend a day or half day? A few years go iIn hiring for a new venture with about 30 people in our main office, we'd invite an individual in before lunch and ask him or her to dive right in.  We needed people who could contribute immediately, so they needed to feel comfortable speaking up, offering ideas and suggestions, and demonstrating that they could add value.  If they were still there when we brought in dinner that night, that was a good sign.

Is a new tech venture different than a museum or other cultural institution, yes, in some ways, though they both face intense competition and must innovate or they'll die on the vine, but that approach can easily be adapted.

In fact, innovative, progressive institutions are probably already doing something other than continuing to follow the traditional hiring process.

If it seemed massively inefficient as an applicant, why continue the practice as a manager?

. . .

Lee Wright  |  The History List  |  The calendar system for history organizations