I’ve hired good people before, and I do OK.”
The trouble with this feel-good statement is that it relates almost entirely to turnover measurements. While turnover is a good measurement, engagement is even more important when it comes to business productivity and profitability.
Numerous reports indicate engagement as:
Many times, engagement is sabotaged from the start through the use of faulty job descriptions. We’ll talk about how to fix that shortly, but first…
There are 3 questions that must be answered before making a critical hiring decision:
1. Can they do the job?
2. How well will they do it?
3. Will they stay & perform?
While it seems simple enough, engagement, turnover, and productivity of most companies doesn’t reflect that these questions are answered sufficiently. In most cases, I think the questions aren’t really understood well enough.
Recently I've seen a deluge of comments in social media forums, Q&A sections, and even advertisements suggesting that to hire successfully you must find those who are not looking for a new job - also known as "passive candidates." The prevailing thought among many seems to be that the best folks in the talent pool are passive candidates.
Sounds theoretically possible, right? Heck, it's good enough for an argument among those who follow broken traditional recruiting processes. But that's not even the most disturbing part of the logic. One of the commentators revealed more than he may have realized when, as he asked for tips and tricks to find passive candidates, he stated that he's got to find more because they are the top talent he needs.
Stop the presses!