That being said, I believe that the baseball analogies that we use here at MoneyLaw really are the most apt at describing what hiring committees should be doing. The whole smash of metaphors--contests, performance, arenas, playing under pressure, position players, etc.--resonates for me. Friends of mine who are on the market this year talk about the endurance aspects of the whole thing. Faculty hiring, perhaps, is its own sport.
I'm not enough of a mainstream athlete to put all of this into a pure sports analogy, and everything that I know about baseball I can put into a two-word sentence ("Seems cool."), but here's my distillation of the MoneyLaw principles when it comes to faculty hiring:
- Pedigree doesn't matter. Performance does.
- "Potential" for performance isn't nearly as good as is proven performance.
- What looks good on paper can look very different in real life.