The Omitted Variable in Data Hiring: Job Design (Hiring Series Part 2)
This is part of a series sharing what we've learned in more than 15 years of attracting and screening education data talent, and what it means in meeting the moment of today's hiring market.
If you have ever watched a strong hire struggle in their first year, you have probably asked the same questions I have. Was this the wrong person? Did we misjudge their skills? Did they lack initiative? Over time, I have come to see a different pattern. In many cases, the issue is not the person at all. It is often the role.
I did not always see that clearly. Like most people who manage teams over time, I learned by watching what helps people succeed and what quietly gets in the way. I've seen hiring decisions that did not work, not because we hired people without talent, but because the jobs were not designed clearly enough for them to succeed.
When authority is fuzzy, decision rights are unclear, or reporting lines are complicated in ways no one named up front, the cost is not just a frustrated hire. It is missed windows to influence decisions, delayed progress, and credibility quietly lost with colleagues. Once that trust erodes, it is hard to rebuild.
Over time, I noticed the same structural failures in other organizations, even when the people hired were highly skilled. When data hires struggled, the first instinct was to question the person. Did something get missed in screening? Were their skills overstated? Was it a culture mismatch? Sometimes those explanations were true. But in other cases, the problem was not the person, but a role that was never set up to succeed.
That realization changed how we work with SDP partners. Slowing down before candidates are put forward to clarify the real work, priorities, ambiguities, and reporting lines has improved both hiring outcomes and the data projects that follow.