By John Beck, Jr.
“Study the past, if you would divine the future.”
— Confucius
Consider a time when you hired an employee that happened to surpass your expectations. Now, think of a time when you hired someone that, at some point, wasn’t the employee you’d hoped for. What did you do different when hiring the top performer versus hiring the less-than-optimal employee? Was the interview different? Was it the background check? Instinct?
In 25 years of business, I’ve come across a number of organizations that are home to managers who can’t manage, salespeople who cannot sell, and senior executives who are unable to lead. There are customer service representatives who are frustrating their customers; quality programs that are discovering people who can’t produce quality results; and empowered work teams that are made up of workers incapable of collaboration.
The real tragedy is that many organizations have come to believe that these things are normal. Many top executives merely shake their heads and say, “That’s the nature of our industry.”
Is it? Or could it be, in most cases, these organizations are using traditional methods of talent acquisition and management that leads them to this so-called “normal” way of doing business? Their hiring processes are stuck in the past, and consumed in the present.
I’m not suggesting the past isn’t important. In fact, when a resume, background, and reference check is part of your hiring process, your odds of hiring a top performer reach 26 percent.
However, buyer beware: 46 percent of resumes contain some type of false information, with 27 percent of job applicants providing fake references and 40 percent stating inaccurate salary claims. Other common resume exaggerations include: dates of employment, job title, criminal records, education, professional licenses, and that hard-to-find “ghost” company. While background checks are effective, and I highly recommend them, keep in mind that even the best background check companies only catch what’s been caught!
While the resume and background check represent a potential employee’s past, the present is all in the interview. When conducted properly, an interview can increase your chances of hiring a great employee by 14 percent.
For the last 20 years, I’ve heard so many hiring managers say, “I can pick ‘em,” or “I’ve got a few tricks I use to hire the right person.” The truth is, most interviewers aren’t trained in conducting structured or behavior-based interviews.
Interviewing is an art; you’re trying to assess past behavior as it relates to specific work competencies. The interview is usually one-on-one “chit chat.”
Instead, interviews should be multi-rated; conducted by no less than two people. You want to eliminate bias, like stereotyping, first impressions, and similar-to-me hires, better known as the dreaded “Halo Effect,” which happens when an interviewer sees something in the candidate that reminds them of themselves.
If you feel confident in your interviewing skills, try Googling “How to beat the interview,” and approximately 208 million results are found. Next, Google “How to conduct a job interview” and you’ll see about 15 million results. In other words, the odds are not in your favor.
CASE-IN-POINT
There are two people who’ve gone through the exact same training, had the same education, and begin work in the same job. One succeeds and one doesn’t. Why?
Job fit has nothing to do with experience, education, skills, training, gender, ethnicity, or age; Success hinges on the individual’s fit with the job.
It’s clear: traditional selection methods that focus on the past and the present can certainly add to the kitty, giving you a combined 40 percent chance in hiring or promoting a top performer that will stick around, but that’s in a perfect world.
Forty percent — pretty good odds, right? Well, I can assure you, organizations can do better. How? We’ve got the past, we have the present, but what about the future? Perhaps a search on Amazon will give you a list of great deals on crystal balls to predict the future performance of individuals you’re going to hire or promote, or you can try something even more effective: employee assessments.
The assessment of individuals has been around since the 6th century B.C. During the era of Chinese political philosopher Confucius, political candidates were assessed on skills such as horsemanship, archery, speaking, calculations, mannerisms, and experience, all before they were allowed to run for office.
Over the years, employee assessments have proven to be an effective tool for identifying potential candidates for job fit, limitations, strengths and growth in an organization. A quality employee assessment should be validated and reliable. Validity is the extent to which an assessment measures, well, what it intends to measure. Reliability refers to the consistency of assessment test items as selected by test-takers as well as the scores obtained when re-tested with the same assessment on different occasions.
Many organizations are moving from antiquated conventional or fixed-form assessments to adaptive assessments. With conventional assessments, all participants are offered the same questions regardless of abilities or behavior. A set number of questions must be completed in order to be scored. Usually conventional assessments are time consuming, and offer a participant a less than engaging assessment experience.
Technology is a powerful tool for improving the employee assessment experience for both the candidate and the organization. Innovations offer increased accuracy, are more enjoyable for the participant, provide improved information for management, and yield higher returns for the organizations. Technology can enhance individual assessment questions and improve the entire measurement process through adaptive testing.
Instead of presenting the same set of questions or items to every applicant, Adaptive Assessments are customized to each. The basic idea is simple, human, and smart. Avoid asking questions that are much too difficult or much too easy for the participant being assessed. Questions that challenge, but don’t overwhelm, will provide the greatest insights into a participant’s abilities and behaviors resulting in increased assessment engagement.
In closing, when it comes to hiring, many companies conduct a few interviews and make an offer to the candidate that impressed them the most. That’s a $25,000-$150,000 (or more) decision, based on a guess.
The empl
oyee selection process is clearly the most important point to impact your organization’s productivity and profitability. Employee assessments are the most effective way to accurately predict the future performance of the candidate you’re considering for a promotion or a hire.
John Beck has 25 years of experience in Management, Human Resources and the Employee Assessment Industry. In addition to hosting the HIRE UP Podcast, John is the CEO The Assessment Company®. He founded the company with one goal in mind; to share his knowledge and spread the word about “Occupational DNA®” and how the ODNA® process can provide meaningful measurable results. For more information, contact John at 800.434.2630 or visit www.AssessmentCompany.com