Screening Out
Candidates for Profitability
Hiring new
employees can be a risky business, though it doesn’t
have to be. One of the more common mistakes I see in the
hiring process is screening in candidates to the pool of
finalists.
What
exactly is screening in? It’s the hope that you’ll end
up with a nice selection of final candidates to find
that diamond in the rough. Making exceptions, creating
shortcuts, or whatever means you use, but the result of
the problem is that you intend to compare candidates to
one another.
Here’s how
it works. Along the way, standards for what makes a good
candidate are gradually lowered. An exception today
results in a shortcut tomorrow, and sooner than you may
think you’ve lost sight of your original standards. What
you may not realize is that you’ll end up with what I
call the ‘best of the mediocre.’
I hear this
quite often, “But there’s something about this candidate
that I really like. I know they don’t meet all the
important criteria that we discussed, but I think
they’re talented enough to change.”
Sure they
are. How many divorced couples thought the same thing
*before* the wedding? Let’s face it, people don’t change
just because you want them to.
How can you
better prepare for these tough issues so your company
becomes stronger, not weaker, from the hiring process?
Many times the criteria for what makes the best
candidate aren’t fully established before the hiring
process begins. So let’s cover that first.
Some
initial questions from hiring managers are:
Can they deliver what I expect?
If so, will they stay as long as I want them to stay?
So how do
you reach those conclusions effectively? By determining
the core attributes required for success in the
position. Here are some examples which may vary
depending on your company and the specific position:
But you
also must consider a fit with the team and especially
the hiring manager:
- Are the values naturally aligned with the company and
the manager?
- Does the natural behavioral style fit well with the
daily activities?
For my
clients I strongly encourage a rating system with
multiple checkpoints to clearly answer these questions
and more. Examples of the checkpoints are: Resume
screening, Assessments, and Personal interviews.
Each
checkpoint has its purpose, and each one builds on the
previous checkpoint to provide greater clarity and
verification. Each candidate, as they progress through
the process, is rated against the original criteria.
Those who don’t meet the criteria are quickly eliminated
without exception.
In this
case, it’s better to pass on a questionable candidate
who *may* be able to do the job effectively than to hire
someone who could cost you tens or hundreds of
thousands. While there are never any assurances in
business, you can stack the odds in your favor by
following this simple philosophy.
Let’s be
clear about one final thing, no candidate is ever going
to meet every standard you determine. However, you need
to know in advance what the most essential attributes
are. Then stick to the original standard without
wavering.
In conclusion, screening
out candidates rated against clear and high core
standards, maintaining integrity throughout the process,
and intentionally creating a selective hiring system
will help you feel better about screening out those
candidates who simply don’t match the top level of
success required for the position.
<
back to articles page |
