The dilemma of filling a position
What is your stance of filling a position in your company? Getting a person you really need and want? Or fill the position and hope for the best?
If you have, like me worked in a large manufacturing concern before, you would appreciate the challenges a human resource executive would have. On one hand, the line people are pressing you to fill jobs. On the other hand, you may not find suitable and qualified candidates to fill those jobs. What would you do? Some might simply resort to filling the jobs with whatever candidates come by. This might pacify the line colleagues initially, but then the candidates weren't suitable to begin with, and turnover occurs, often more than necessary. The end result is that nobody is pacified.
I am of the belief, that in today's context, it is probably better for everyone (the company, the human resource folks, the line folks, and the candidates), that only the right candidates are recruited for the particular jobs. It would certainly reduce turnover because the right candidate is recruited for the right job, and would reduce the variables that increase staff turnover in the first place. If there aren't candidates that fit the job, I would recommend waiting rather than recruiting anybody and then realizing you may have to let the person go very soon.
It is certainly no walk in the park to find the right candidates. Who would be the right candidates for a particular job?
Two things come to mind - attitude and aptitude.
Aptitude for a particular job may refer to competency to perform at a certain level. There are many candidates to choose from these days. For most jobs, some kind of prerequisites must be fulfilled. For example, some jobs have field experience requirements. You can't operate on someone unless you are trained as a surgeon, and have done sufficient hours in a hospital. Some jobs make technical demands on a person. You can't be a combat commando or a naval diver if you don't have the prerequisite fitness levels. Some jobs demand dexterity, knowledge, mental reflexes, and so on, which must be met before the candidates can be considered for shortlisting.
But, having considered all these, attitude is important too, and imho, perhaps even more important for entry-level or certain professions. I remember fondly, when I was recruited for a banking job in the 1980s, the vice president who saw me said that academic qualifications weren't all that important, and that it is the potential and the attitude of the person that would make the difference. If you are hungry to succeed and perform at a job, you would make every effort to learn fast and voraciously, work harder than others, and be committed to making contributions to the company. Contrast this person with someone with all the qualifications, but no desire to work hard or learn.
Filling a position should not be a trivial decision. Treat it like a serious relationship you hope to develop for the long term. The candidate whom you hire, will appreciate that he/she is the right candidate and would also hope to work with you for the long haul.