If your perfect candidate can already do 100% of the job, why would they take It?

If your perfect candidate can already do 100% of the job, why would they take it?

One mistake I see repeatedly, hiring managers looking for someone who can walk in on day one and do everything on the job description without missing a beat.

I understand why. You want faster ramp-ups and less handholding. You’re under pressure to fill the role, get someone productive quickly, and move on to the next fire.

But it’s also one of the quickest ways to push away the very people you hope to attract.

The strongest candidates aren’t looking to do the exact same job they’re already doing somewhere else. They move for growth. If someone is thriving where they are, you’re not going to pull them away with a lateral move and a slightly higher salary, and retain them. There has to be something in it for good performers: a new challenge, a skill they haven’t mastered yet, a bigger scope, and maybe a step forward.

Money matters, but it’s not enough to guide the whole decision. The best people have a plan. They’re choosing a career path, not just another job.

Why strong candidates move.

The best people aren’t passively browsing job boards hoping for a ten percent raise. They’re intentional about their careers.

They’re asking: Will this role teach me something I don’t already know? Will I work with people who will hold me to a higher standard? Will I have more responsibility, more scope, and more impact? Does this move me closer to where I want to be in three years?

If your job description reads like an exact replica of what they’re already doing, the answer to all of those questions is no.

And the reality is that if someone is good at their current job and happy enough, inertia is powerful. Switching jobs is hard, risky, and disruptive. There has to be a compelling reason to make the leap. A slightly higher salary and the same responsibilities aren’t compelling reasons enough to overcome the inertia of staying put.

What is compelling is the chance to lead a team for the first time, the opportunity to own a broader scope, and the ability to work on problems they haven’t solved before. A role that stretches them in ways their current job doesn’t. That’s what pulls great people out of good situations.

‍

The sweet spot: hiring for growth.

The best permanent hires aren’t people who can already do one hundred percent of the job. They’re people who can do most of it today and will grow into the rest.

It’s not an exact science but try to look for someone who can handle about seventy percent of the role from day one, with about thirty percent that’s new and will stretch them. That’s just a way of framing it, and the specific numbers matter less than the principle, which is to allow for growth.

Too little stretch and they’re bored within six months. They took a lateral move, and now they’re looking again. You’ve hired someone who’s disengaging before they’ve fully onboarded.

Too much stretch and they’re overwhelmed. They’re spending all their energy just keeping up, which means they’re not contributing to the level you need. Risk of burnout increases and chances you’ll be able to retain over the long term diminish.

People thrive somewhere in the middle. They’re challenged but not drowning, learning but still contributing, and they’re motivated because they can see themselves growing into the role.

A senior developer who has mastered backend work now gets the chance to own a broader stack backend, frontend integration, and maybe infrastructure decisions. Someone currently managing a team of three people steps into a role where they’ll lead six to eight. An individual contributor who isn’t leading a team today but clearly has the skills to do it because they communicate well, show good judgment, are already the person others go to when things get complicated.

In each case, the foundation is there. The stretch is real but manageable. And that combination creates engagement.

‍

When you need someone who can just step in.

Sometimes you genuinely need someone who can do one hundred percent of the job from day one. Maybe you’re in crisis mode and the project is time-sensitive. Perhaps the team is underwater and can’t afford to wait for someone to ramp up.

If that’s the case, you probably don’t need a permanent hire. You need a contractor.

Contractors are built for this. They’re experts in a narrow domain who’ve done this exact thing many times before. They don’t need extensive onboarding, and they don’t need coaching. They get the work done and move on.

Permanent hires are not built for this. They’re joining your team for the long term. They need to integrate, learn about your systems, understand your culture, and build relationships. If you’re hiring someone permanent who already knows everything, they’ll be bored and looking for the next opportunity within a year.

The smarter move is to bring in a contractor to solve the immediate problem. When things stabilize, hire a permanent person who has room to grow into the role. This is one of the strategic advantages of staff augmentation done right. You get the exact expertise you need, when you need it, without locking yourself into a permanent hire who’s overqualified and disengaged.

‍

The hidden cost of hiring for that 100% match.

When you insist on someone who can already do every single thing in the job description, you attract lateral movers, not top performers. The people who apply are the ones making lateral moves often because they’re stuck, bored, or running away from something at their current job. Those are rarely the best hires.

The people who could truly elevate your team never apply, because nothing about the role suggests they’ll grow.

Even if you find someone who checks every box, they disengage quickly. They’re doing the work they’ve already done. There’s no challenge. No learning. No excitement. Within six to twelve months, they’re quietly looking again.

Meanwhile, the person who can do seventy percent of the job today but has the capacity to grow into one hundred fifty percent of the job in two years? You passed on them because they didn’t have one line item on your checklist. The person who could do one hundred percent today might still be doing one hundred percent in two years because there’s nowhere for them to grow.

‍

How to hire for the 30% stretch.

Start by separating what’s core from what’s stretch. Core capabilities are the must-have, foundational skills and experience the person needs to be effective in the role. Stretch areas are the growth opportunities they’ll develop, responsibilities they’ll grow into, and scope they’ll expand.

For a backend engineering role, core might be strong technical skills, experience working in distributed teams, good judgment, ownership thinking, and clear communication. Stretch might be leading technical architecture decisions, mentoring junior engineers, working cross-functionally with product and design.

When you’re writing the job description and talking to candidates, lead with the presentation of stretch opportunities. Don’t say “we need a senior backend engineer with 8+ years of experience who can lead architecture decisions and mentor junior engineers.” Say “we’re looking for a strong backend engineer ready to step into technical leadership, so you’ll have the opportunity to shape our architecture, mentor a growing team, and expand your scope beyond pure coding.”

The second version signals growth. It tells the candidate this role will challenge you in ways your current job doesn’t.

Then hire for capability, not credentials. Look for people who have foundational traits like judgment, learning agility, problem-solving, and ownership, even if they don’t have every line item on your list. Someone with strong judgment and learning agility can pick up new skills faster than someone with all the credentials but no growth mindset.

And be honest about the stretch. When you’re talking to candidates, be transparent about what’s new. Don’t oversell it. “You’ll figure it out” isn’t a plan. Create a plan: “You’ll be stepping into technical leadership for the first time. We’ll support you with regular coaching from the VP Engineering, a mentor outside the team, and a clear ramp plan for the first 90 days.”

Candidates appreciate transparency. They want to know that you’ve thought about how to set them up for success.

‍

What this means in practice.

If your perfect candidate can already do one hundred percent of the job, ask yourself: why would they take it?

The strongest candidates move for growth. They’re choosing a career path, not just a paycheck. The sweet spot is the thirty percent stretch, so hire someone who can do seventy percent of the job today and will grow into the rest. That’s where people are motivated, engaged, and stick around for the long-term.

When you genuinely need someone who can do one hundred percent from day one, hire a contractor. Get the work done. Then hire a permanent person who has room to grow.

When you insist on an exact match, you attract lateral movers who disengage quickly. Meanwhile, the people who could truly elevate your team never apply because nothing about the role suggests they’ll grow.

Hire potential, not just credentials. Hire for trajectory, not just current capability. Hire someone for what they can become in two years, not just for what they are today. That’s how you build teams that don’t just execute; they evolve.

If you’re building a team and want help with thinking through how to design roles that will attract strong candidates and who will grow with you, reach out. We’ve spent years helping companies move from impossible job descriptions to roles that set people up to succeed.

‍