Pop quiz: Are you more likely to hire the best candidate with a two-step interview process, or a five-step interview process? Answer:It depends on the steps! These days, few employers are actively recruiting new talent.
While the job market continues to strengthen, companies are still hesitant to add to their payroll, leaving many highly qualified job seekers in the lurch.
Even worse, the companies committed to hiring, rely on outdated, unorganized and ineffective recruiting techniques, overlooking or scaring away potential new hires.
Either way, without a well thought out strategy, both sides will suffer.
Fortunately, it only takes a little extra effort to ensure your recruiting process is part of the solution, rather than the problem.
Watch your Step! Years ago, I worked with a client with very compelling story to tell.
The company was founder-run, had consistent sales, and offered an innovative product.
They engaged us to manage the search for a CFO and described their interviewing process like this, "We believe in building consensus when bringing in new talent," the CEO explained, "The first step in our process is a phone interview with one of our HR Associates, followed by another phone interview with our VP of HR.
Assuming those calls go well, we send a personality assessment to the candidate because we believe our culture is quite unique and we don't want to make any hiring mistakes.
" Keep in mind this company was on a rapid growth path and their existing employees had been working 60-hour workweeks for the past six months.
The CEO continued, "Once they complete the personality assessment, we bring them in to meet our VP of HR in person.
She is an outstanding judge of character and knows a good hire when she sees it.
" At this point, I realized there were a number of problems with this client's recruiting approach but this was the biggest red flag.
A hiring manager who says they "know a good hire when they see one "or "I hire based on gut," often makes poor hiring decisions.
If you find yourself saying anything similar, it may be time for a new process! Back to the CEO...
"Once the VP of HR gives her blessing, the candidate meets with four of our Executive Team members before sitting down with me so I can make a final assessment of their fit in the organization.
This is a very important hire for us and we hope to make this hire within the next four to five weeks.
" Are you serious? One Step at a Time While this scenario may sound outrageous, it's fairly common.
The point of sharing this story is not to dismiss the importance of a comprehensive hiring process.
Generally speaking, panel interviews, personality assessments and phone screens are not bad ideas.
The justification for each step makes perfect sense when considered individually.
But, collectively it's a lot of hoops for a candidate to jump, and you have to ask yourself: Is every step necessary and does it provide meaningful value in my hiring decision? Always consider the level of the position, the time commitment from the candidate, and most importantly, the relevant takeaways from each step.
For example, what is the value of subjecting the candidate to two phone interviews with HR, in addition to a personality assessment and an in person meeting with same group? A simpler approach is to conduct one phone interview to screen the candidate, and then immediately follow it with the personality assessment and an in-person meeting.
Even simpler, eliminate the phone interview altogether, making the in-person meeting with HR and personality assessment a more effective "first step.
" Also, considering this position will be part of the executive team, reporting to the CEO directly - and given the importance of the cultural fit between the candidate and the CEO - does it make sense to wait until the very end of the recruiting process for the first face to face interaction between the CEO and the candidate? I realize the CEO may not have the time to meet every prospect, but the candidate should have the opportunity to meet the CEO on more than one occasion, and much earlier in the process.
The bottom line is this, it is important that you evaluate your recruiting process to ensure each phase adds incremental value, and then customize the process based on the significance of the role.
Also be mindful of the candidate's time and perspective.
Here is a simple litmus test to determine the effectiveness of your hiring process: 1.
Does each step in your process add incremental value - e.
g.
will you learn something new and relevant about the candidate at each step? 2.
Did you consider the level of the position and its contribution to the business - e.
g.
will this position own a complete P&L or will it focus on processing reports? 3.
Do the participants in the process understand their role? Are they being held accountable to gather specific information? Have they been trained on how to conduct an effective interview? 4.
Are you communicating with the candidate about the process and setting clear expectations from the beginning? 5.
Are you tracking the success of current and previous hires to determine the effectiveness of your process - e.
g.
how accurate is our personality and/or technical assessment as a predictor of fit and tenure? As the war for talent continues to heat up in certain sectors, and our economy slowly emerges from its five-year downturn, deploying the right hiring process could mean the difference between attracting the best talent, and settling for the available talent.
Remember, hiring "best in class" talent requires a "best in class" process.
While the job market continues to strengthen, companies are still hesitant to add to their payroll, leaving many highly qualified job seekers in the lurch.
Even worse, the companies committed to hiring, rely on outdated, unorganized and ineffective recruiting techniques, overlooking or scaring away potential new hires.
Either way, without a well thought out strategy, both sides will suffer.
Fortunately, it only takes a little extra effort to ensure your recruiting process is part of the solution, rather than the problem.
Watch your Step! Years ago, I worked with a client with very compelling story to tell.
The company was founder-run, had consistent sales, and offered an innovative product.
They engaged us to manage the search for a CFO and described their interviewing process like this, "We believe in building consensus when bringing in new talent," the CEO explained, "The first step in our process is a phone interview with one of our HR Associates, followed by another phone interview with our VP of HR.
Assuming those calls go well, we send a personality assessment to the candidate because we believe our culture is quite unique and we don't want to make any hiring mistakes.
" Keep in mind this company was on a rapid growth path and their existing employees had been working 60-hour workweeks for the past six months.
The CEO continued, "Once they complete the personality assessment, we bring them in to meet our VP of HR in person.
She is an outstanding judge of character and knows a good hire when she sees it.
" At this point, I realized there were a number of problems with this client's recruiting approach but this was the biggest red flag.
A hiring manager who says they "know a good hire when they see one "or "I hire based on gut," often makes poor hiring decisions.
If you find yourself saying anything similar, it may be time for a new process! Back to the CEO...
"Once the VP of HR gives her blessing, the candidate meets with four of our Executive Team members before sitting down with me so I can make a final assessment of their fit in the organization.
This is a very important hire for us and we hope to make this hire within the next four to five weeks.
" Are you serious? One Step at a Time While this scenario may sound outrageous, it's fairly common.
The point of sharing this story is not to dismiss the importance of a comprehensive hiring process.
Generally speaking, panel interviews, personality assessments and phone screens are not bad ideas.
The justification for each step makes perfect sense when considered individually.
But, collectively it's a lot of hoops for a candidate to jump, and you have to ask yourself: Is every step necessary and does it provide meaningful value in my hiring decision? Always consider the level of the position, the time commitment from the candidate, and most importantly, the relevant takeaways from each step.
For example, what is the value of subjecting the candidate to two phone interviews with HR, in addition to a personality assessment and an in person meeting with same group? A simpler approach is to conduct one phone interview to screen the candidate, and then immediately follow it with the personality assessment and an in-person meeting.
Even simpler, eliminate the phone interview altogether, making the in-person meeting with HR and personality assessment a more effective "first step.
" Also, considering this position will be part of the executive team, reporting to the CEO directly - and given the importance of the cultural fit between the candidate and the CEO - does it make sense to wait until the very end of the recruiting process for the first face to face interaction between the CEO and the candidate? I realize the CEO may not have the time to meet every prospect, but the candidate should have the opportunity to meet the CEO on more than one occasion, and much earlier in the process.
The bottom line is this, it is important that you evaluate your recruiting process to ensure each phase adds incremental value, and then customize the process based on the significance of the role.
Also be mindful of the candidate's time and perspective.
Here is a simple litmus test to determine the effectiveness of your hiring process: 1.
Does each step in your process add incremental value - e.
g.
will you learn something new and relevant about the candidate at each step? 2.
Did you consider the level of the position and its contribution to the business - e.
g.
will this position own a complete P&L or will it focus on processing reports? 3.
Do the participants in the process understand their role? Are they being held accountable to gather specific information? Have they been trained on how to conduct an effective interview? 4.
Are you communicating with the candidate about the process and setting clear expectations from the beginning? 5.
Are you tracking the success of current and previous hires to determine the effectiveness of your process - e.
g.
how accurate is our personality and/or technical assessment as a predictor of fit and tenure? As the war for talent continues to heat up in certain sectors, and our economy slowly emerges from its five-year downturn, deploying the right hiring process could mean the difference between attracting the best talent, and settling for the available talent.
Remember, hiring "best in class" talent requires a "best in class" process.