I've heard many canned responses to this, mostly about youngsters having more energy and in some way that extrapolates to having more "potential" or being better for a company. But my question here is, really?
How can age alone tell you about how well a person is going to perform or how valuable of an asset he can be to a company? After some thought, I agree it is one factor, but I still maintain doesn't entirely make a case for or against anyone. In fact, I feel it's kind of unfair to those over who are "less" preferred in startup jobs. If a person is willing to learn, has talent, and is passionate — heck, give him a shot.
I'm not accusing you of doing so, just pointing out a trend. And BTW, I'm 18 years old.
You obviously have more experience in hiring (maybe even firing) people, so could you tell me if I'm right here?
You're - again IMO - right about it being only one of the factors.
The reason we hire mostly 'youngsters' (damn, never thought I would say this before reaching 30 myself) is that 'they' are more readily available. I'm in no way saying that young people have more energy, are more driven.
A reason you MIGHT consider - which I consider applicable to myself as well - is that as people 'age' their priorities shift.
I have to young kids at home (2 y/o and 5 w/o) and I consider them my absolute number one priority.
Most people in their early twenties don't have to make these priority considerations and are 'likely' to be more dedicated to your company (or at least appear to be). On the flipside: I guess twentysomethings are easier to ditch your company and leave for a better paycheck as well.
That's why I'm saying that I never really take age into consideration when considering a candidate. It just isn't a factor for me.
For me, most imporant things are (in no particular order):
Could you please clarify about "cultural match"? Provided that the person is good and kind, but e.g. likes different music genres, or thinks that hunting is like a killing a human (while some existing teammate is hunter), would you consider this case as a cultural mismatch?
Although this is more of a personal thing I would never judge people based on their musical preference (that's what headphones are for ;-)) and hobbies. Cultural is - for me - a combination of drive (yes, one of the other factors) and the ability to work with others without driving them to tears. That and a flexible sense of humour ;-)
I've heard many canned responses to this, mostly about youngsters having more energy and in some way that extrapolates to having more "potential" or being better for a company. But my question here is, really?
How can age alone tell you about how well a person is going to perform or how valuable of an asset he can be to a company? After some thought, I agree it is one factor, but I still maintain doesn't entirely make a case for or against anyone. In fact, I feel it's kind of unfair to those over who are "less" preferred in startup jobs. If a person is willing to learn, has talent, and is passionate — heck, give him a shot.
I'm not accusing you of doing so, just pointing out a trend. And BTW, I'm 18 years old.
You obviously have more experience in hiring (maybe even firing) people, so could you tell me if I'm right here?