I am a mathematics professor who has served on several hiring committees. In our context this would be impossible.
In particular, I was asked to help hire an algebraic geometer -- algebraic geometry not being my specialty. For me to read and understand the highly technical papers of each of 500 job applicants, outside my area of expertise, would take an astronomical amount of effort -- completely out of the question.
And not only that, but distinguishing thorny unsolved problems from fairly routine technical exercises is quite a challenge -- one reason that high-end journals solicit multiple reviews. It is sometimes possible to fool many (but not all) of the experts.
We rely principally on recommendation letters (generic, and submitted via a centralized system, so candidates can get one set of letters for all jobs to which they apply). But, yes, which journals candidates have published in is important.
>high-end journals solicit multiple reviews. It is sometimes possible to fool many (but not all) of the experts.
I thought this was a debated point. Don't a lot of people assert that the prestigious high end journals don't really review them for correctness etc, but instead focus on how "ground-breaking" or "news worthy" ??
Experts are sometimes necessary to identify and translate the papers into something that you can understand—include whether it's ground-breaking or news-worthy.
> In particular, I was asked to help hire an algebraic geometer -- algebraic geometry not being my specialty.
Why were you selected then?
> For me to read and understand the highly technical papers of each of 500 job applicants
Why did you, as a professor, wasted your time even reading the 500 names of the applicants? Wouldn't your time be better spent if somebody else did some background research, filtered 95% of the candidates and you were provided only a short list of the best candidates that you could carefully inspect?
Even in a large department, individual specialties may have one or only a few experts. Sometimes none if the department is looking to branch out or fill a gap. There's also typically competition between groups for hires, so no group gets the final decision on which candidate to present (to the department, then the dean, and on up the chain...)
As for the filtering, there aren't any widely accepted ways for a nonspecialist to rank candidates. Hiring committees are a standard part of a professor's job.
In particular, I was asked to help hire an algebraic geometer -- algebraic geometry not being my specialty. For me to read and understand the highly technical papers of each of 500 job applicants, outside my area of expertise, would take an astronomical amount of effort -- completely out of the question.
And not only that, but distinguishing thorny unsolved problems from fairly routine technical exercises is quite a challenge -- one reason that high-end journals solicit multiple reviews. It is sometimes possible to fool many (but not all) of the experts.
We rely principally on recommendation letters (generic, and submitted via a centralized system, so candidates can get one set of letters for all jobs to which they apply). But, yes, which journals candidates have published in is important.