For decades, Canadian job descriptions have relied on a familiar requirement: “Must have 5 to 7 years of experience.”
It seems like a reasonable way to narrow the candidate pool. But after 25 years in executive search, top Canadian recruitment agencies like us have seen rigid experience requirements exclude capable candidates while letting others advance simply because their resumes meet the stated criteria.
As more organizations explore skills-based hiring, employers are questioning whether time spent in a role tells them enough about a candidate’s capabilities. Experience matters, but it doesn’t automatically translate into competence or results.
Experienced recruiters look beyond job titles and tenure to understand what candidates have accomplished, how they’ve handled challenges and whether their experience translates to an employer’s needs.
The Problem with Measuring Time Instead of Impact
Years of experience provide useful context, but they don’t tell the whole story.
Someone can spend five years in a position performing familiar tasks without developing new competencies. Another professional might spend three years leading major initiatives, navigating market disruptions and solving complex operational problems.
When hiring managers rely too heavily on tenure, they risk overlooking important differences between candidates.
- It assumes continuous growth: Two professionals with the same years of experience may have developed very different skills and levels of responsibility.
- It can exclude capable candidates: Professionals who have progressed quickly or developed transferable skills may be overlooked because they don’t meet an arbitrary threshold.
- It overlooks transferable skills: Problem-solving, adaptability, communication, and leadership can matter as much as experience in a particular title, especially for management roles.
The goal isn’t to disregard experience. It’s to understand what candidates have learned and achieved during that time.
Keep reading: Can AI Really Find Your Next Great Hire?
3 Ways to Evaluate Real Capability
1. Probe for Tangible Accomplishments
Instead of focusing exclusively on how long someone managed a team or held a portfolio, ask what changed under their leadership.
Consider questions such as:
- Did they build, scale, or turn around a business unit?
- What measurable revenue growth, cost savings, or efficiency improvements did they contribute to?
- How did they handle a significant setback, and what did they learn?
- What was their individual contribution to the results?
Context matters, too. A candidate’s achievements should be evaluated against the resources available, the challenges they faced, and the responsibilities they actually held. This provides a clearer picture of their impact than tenure alone.
2. Prioritize Core Competencies and Values Alignment
Technical expertise is essential, but employers also need to understand how candidates make decisions, work with others, and respond to challenges.
Evaluate three areas:
- Role-specific expertise: Does the candidate have the technical knowledge and relevant experience required for the position?
- Transferable competencies: Can they demonstrate sound judgment, communication, problem-solving, and adaptability?
- Values alignment: Do their behaviours and decision-making approach reflect the organization’s stated values?
Values alignment shouldn’t mean hiring people who simply resemble the existing team. Employers should define the behaviours that matter and assess candidates consistently.
Headhunter insights: Can You Trust What’s on a Resume Anymore? How Employers Can Hire with Confidence
3. Use Structured Interviews to Examine Career History
Informal interviews can make it difficult to distinguish genuine achievements from confident but vague answers. A structured approach gives hiring teams a more consistent way to evaluate candidates.
Topgrading-style interviews, which examine a candidate’s career history in detail, offer one approach. Employers can explore:
- Responsibilities, achievements, and reasons for leaving previous roles.
- How candidates handled challenges, setbacks, and changes in responsibility.
- What they learned in each position and how their performance developed.
- Relevant feedback from previous supervisors, verified through appropriate reference checks.
The objective isn’t to favour candidates with the longest resumes. It’s to gather credible evidence of their capabilities, development, and potential contribution.
Building Stronger Teams
Should employers prioritize skills or years of experience? The answer depends on the role. Positions requiring specialized expertise, regulatory knowledge, or substantial leadership responsibility may justify minimum experience requirements. But those requirements should reflect genuine business needs rather than arbitrary conventions.
By combining relevant experience with measurable accomplishments, structured interviews, and core competencies, employers can make more informed hiring decisions.
Looking for the right talent for your team? Connect with IQ PARTNERS to discuss your recruitment needs.
