The hiring process can be a fraught, difficult one.
For employers, the key concerns are legion: character, discipline, technical abilities, and soft skills are just some of the many considerations that any hiring manager must consider. To make things worse, many companies don’t necessarily have a systematic, organized approach–either to hiring or vetting candidates. Instead, they often rely on practices such as word of mouth referrals or the instincts of individual HR personnel; needless to say, this is hardly a recipe for success.
But when it comes to vetting job candidates, it is possible to build a fair, consistent framework that can smooth out the bumps and obstacles of the hiring process. Obviously, it will never be possible to take all the uncertainty out of the picture: after all, human nature is variable and does change depending on circumstance.
Still, following these best practices can remove much of the headache and frustration that comes with bad hires.
Agree on the important details
Believe it or not, there is a significant amount of disagreement and disunity amongst the parties involved in the hiring process. For one, a CFO might want to keep the company’s balance sheet healthy and hire someone who asks for a lower salary. Direct managers might want someone who is flexible, independent, capable, and easy to get along with. HR departments just want someone who will abide by the law and avoid any transgressions.
For this reason, it might be easier to vet a candidate with an objective score. The first step is to understand that there is no perfect hire; instead, everyone will have flaws and strengths. The key is to find the best balance for the position.
Instead of devolving into disagreements, brainstorm a few areas and weigh them differently. What are you looking for? A candidate who is willing to be paid a certain amount (perhaps $100,000-$150,000 a year for a midlevel management position), with a certain amount of experience (say 5-7 years), has no negative legal history, and has specific skillsets (perhaps managed complex infrastructure projects in foreign nations, such as oil fields or bridge building). Create several categories, and rate each candidate’s strengths and weaknesses. Hopefully, you’ll find a well-rounded candidate that is more to everyone’s liking.
Go beyond the references
How can you get an accurate picture of a candidate’s work personality and habits? How can you go beyond the rosy images painted by positive references?
Seek out a blind reference. As Brian Halligan, CEO of internet marketing powerhouse Hubspot writes, a blind reference can be far more illuminating than an interview, and certainly far more helpful than the cherry-picked references that your job candidate submitted. It’s also surprisingly easy to pull off: simply search your shared social networks, and see if you have any connections to the potential hire. Reach out to them and ask them for an opportunity to chat about this person–either on Skype, LinkedIn, email, or another messaging service.
Given that this technique depends on your shared social/professional circle, this isn’t always easy to pull off. For instance, if you’re hiring someone from another region or country, it may be difficult to find common acquaintances. Done right, however, it can yield some very interesting insights. You’ll receive an unfiltered report–and given that it’s a blind reference check, you’re more likely to get a good dose of candor and honesty along the way.
I’d advocate going one step further and speaking specifically to subordinates who worked under this person in the past. To paraphrase the old saying, you can easily judge people’s character by how they treat those below them–either socially or professionally. As such, don’t just go to an old boss or supervisor; instead, seek out the job candidate’s previous direct reports if possible. This way, you can more accurately gauge their personality; if someone who was supervised by this person in the past has only glowing words to say, their words are worth far more than the potential hire’s previous supervisors.
After all, what reason would a direct report have to lie? By that time, their fates are no longer bound together, and genuine affection or loyalty is the only reason. If, on the other hand, the person only has nasty, unpleasant memories even after a while–then you know to stay well away.
Introduce some uncertainty into the interview process
Stress is a fact of modern life. Very often, it arises from the gap between expectations and reality, between our level of preparedness and the (often negative) situations that arise.
As a result, it’s important to see how employees will deal with the unexpected. Anyone can put on a smiling facade during the best of times–but character is only revealed under pressure. In times of difficulty, a person will reveal who (s)he truly is. Are they someone who can be relied on to answer problems with professionalism and a cool head? Or will they break down and lash out?
Obviously, this comes with some parameters. I’m not saying to abuse anyone physically or verbally or to demand that a candidate do push-ups or other exercises. Instead, test them with some situations that your company may have encountered in the past. For example, put them into a group discussion with their new department, and have them create hypothetical conditions to work under. To add an extra level of difficulty, don’t inform the interviewee about this group discussion; rather, assess how they work during this time.
Screen for emotional intelligence
Beyond just technical skills, it’s essential to assess a candidate’s emotional intelligence, or soft skills. In fact, one 2011 survey found that 34 percent of hiring managers prioritize soft skills over hard, or technical, ones. These managers found that employees with strong emotional intelligence stayed calm under pressure, could more effectively resolve conflict, led by example, and were more empathetic.
Granted, this isn’t to say that hard skills aren’t useful. Some roles, like engineers or doctors, will require professional and technical training. However, between two equally qualified candidates with similar backgrounds, hiring managers should give precedence to the one with a stronger grasp of emotional intelligence. If you’re not convinced, bear in mind that harsh, rude people with weak soft skills can contribute to a corrosive work environment. For one, these negative behaviors are contagious, spreading throughout the workplace. For another, 83 percent of organizations were negatively impacted by excessive workplace stress, including missed deadlines, accidents, mistakes, increased interpersonal strife, and of course, financial penalties.
The important thing to note is that through focusing on smaller details (and conducting blind references), hiring managers can get a better picture of a person’s emotional intelligence. Christine Porath, a professor at Georgetown University, has created a succinct list of observable behaviors and questions. This detailed survey of a person’s emotional awareness includes topics such as how someone dealt with stress or conflict, indicators that someone is under too much stress, or lessons one has learned from failure. In addition, Porath advises that managers look for the small things: punctuality of a candidate, whether they spoke negatively of others, or whether they took responsibility for negative outcomes and behaviors–or deferred it to others.
In the end, the job interview process doesn’t have to be fraught and difficult. Though a degree of uncertainty will always exist (human nature being what it is), companies can create methodical, streamlined checklists and processes to vet potential hires. Doing so will save your organization a lot of stress and (financial) grief later on.