Sometimes a weak assessment is due more to poor interviewing skills than a weak candidate. You need to be a good interviewer to evaluate the candidate properly. In the process, you’ll attract a bet- ter class of candidates. Here’s why. The best candidates want to work for great managers, and good interviewing skills, especially knowledge of the job, demonstrate this. Candidates judge the qual- ity of the company and the quality of their potential supervisor by the quality of the interviewing process.
The quality of the assessment process is only as good as its weakest interviewer. This is especially true if every person has an equal vote. If you rely on the weak assessment skills of others, the whole process is compromised. I’ve seen many strong candidates
164 ➤ HIRE WITH YOUR HEAD
lose out, because one or two interviewers missed the mark. The hir- ing manager must be confident enough to override these flawed in- puts. That’s why giving partial voting rights is so important.
On a search for a vice president of HR, the CEO of a large finan- cial organization wanted to reduce the scope of the inputs of a few members of the interviewing team, while still giving them the cour- tesy of having an input. We told these interviewers that the CEO and CFO thought that one candidate was the best candidate of the five presented. Their only role was to determine whether there were any fatal flaws in the candidate that had not yet been detected. By limit- ing the authority of other interviewers this way, you can minimize the problems associated with weaker interviewers.
A different tactic is required if the problem is the hiring man- ager’s boss. This is a problem if the boss is a weak interviewer, or just wants to conduct a personality and fit interview. In this case, it’s best to write up the reasons why you want to hire the candidate be- forehand, and ask the boss to validate one specific area only. The primary performance objective is a good choice for this. By narrow- ing the scope of a less reliable interviewer, you can easily turn a personality contest into a short performance-based interview.
If the weak interviewer is the hiring manager, it’s best to conduct a panel interview with some good interviewers taking the lead. This al- lows the hiring manager to participate. Lots of time is wasted, and bad hiring decisions are made, when incompetent interviewers influence the final decision. Identify these “problem people” and establish al- ternative procedures ahead of time. There is too much riding on every hiring decision to allow controllable error to affect the outcome.
HOT TIPS FOR IMPLEMENTING AN EVIDENCE-BASED ASSESSMENT PROCESS
The likelihood that every individual hiring manager in your company will prepare a performance profile, wait 30 minutes, conduct the two- question performance-based interview, complete the 10-Factor Can- didate Assessment template, and then share information before voting yes or no is remote. It takes a disciplined person to pull this off. Yet, that’s all there is to increasing hiring accuracy into the 70 per- cent to 80 percent range. (Note: References checks, testing, and
adle_c05.qxd 4/26/07 9:20 AM Page 164
The Evidence-Based Assessment ➤ 165
background verification can boost it even higher.) Enacting a few rules will instill this type of discipline throughout your company’s entire management team. The following checklist reinforces the necessary guidelines:
✔ Only give the hiring manager full voting rights. Assign everyone else a narrow range of traits to evaluate instead.
✔ Make sure everyone uses the 10-Factor Candidate Assessment template to evaluate the candidate, including the hiring man- ager. Use detailed examples of past performance to rank each factor, not intuition or gut feelings.
✔ Every interviewer must be prepared before the interview. This includes reviewing the resume, reading the performance profile, knowing his or her assigned roles, and how to conduct the two- question interview.
✔ Invoke the “collect information before deciding” method of in- terviewing. This means everyone must put his emotional biases in the parking lot the moment he meets the candidate.
✔ Look for an upward pattern of personal growth and develop- ment. Be concerned if growth has flattened or is declining, along with motivation.
✔ Debrief formally using the 10-Factor template as a guide. Share information on each factor before deciding. Start with the posi- tives, and make sure the lowest-ranking person speaks first.
✔ No Level 2s! Go out of your way to not hire people who are un- motivated to do the exact work you require.
✔ Compare the environment (complexity, growth, standards, pace, level of bureaucracy) of the candidate’s prior companies to your needs to determine real compatibility.
✔ Watch out for the fatal flaws—too bright, too dominant, too ana- lytical, too clever, or too many excuses. Too much of anything can be a clue to a problem.
✔ A professional, well-run interview is as important to you as it is to the candidate. Strong candidates judge companies and man- agers based on the quality of the interviewing process. Unless the interview is thorough, the conclusions obtained will be less reliable.
adle_c05.qxd 4/26/07 9:20 AM Page 166
167
6
C h a p t e r
Everything Else after the First Interview:
Completing the Assignment
Far more crucial than what we know or do not know is what we do not want to know.
—Eric Hoffer