There is a war on over human talent but you would not know
it if you spoke to most executives. With unemployment hovering just above 7%
there should be plenty of people to choose from, just happy to have a job. Wait a minute, isn’t that what they said when
unemployment was nearly 12%? So the number of people out of work and seeking
jobs has dropped 40% and still it should be no problem to find good people.
Just run an ad on Craig ‘s List and the resumes will pour in.
This may be true, but the avalanche of resumes won’t
represent the quality or level of employees that you’re looking for. Oh, by the
way, it gets worse. The ugly truth is that most organizations have no idea how
to even identify quality personnel. Don’t believe me, keep reading.
To begin with, does your firm even know what a quality
applicant would look like? Sure you may have a job description and you may have
even put together a list of qualifications but does this information lead you
to a highly qualified candidate. I doubt it. In fact, I can guarantee that your
firm has done absolutely nothing to correlate and validate any of these
qualifications to high potential hires. Heck, I would be shocked if the
contents of your performance review assessments reflected even half of these
qualifications. Try to keep up with me.
If the competencies required for the position are not reflected in your
performance review criteria, then how meaningful can they be?
However, I will pick an easy illustration such as, good
communication skills. Maybe, just maybe, this is one of the few mandated new
hire capabilities that is also assessed during the employee’s annual evaluation.
But how do you know if the person has good communication skills? Why does this
matter for this particular job? How do you evaluate candidates for this
competency and what is the relationship between your assessment of the
individual when hired and now during their performance review?
I bet you cannot even recall how you evaluated them as a
candidate. Even if you can, I suspect, their on the job communication performance
is different than what you expected. And
if there is a difference between your ability to accurately evaluate a person’s
basic communication skills, what other costly mistakes and misjudgments have
you made about the candidates you interviewed?
If the people you employ are performing less than you
expected, are you beginning to wonder what happened to the people you
hired? Maybe you should wonder what you
are doing wrong because you’re the one making the purchasing decisions, you are
making the offer, your the one deciding who is best qualified, or are you?
Chances are both you and your organization are not qualified
to hire or keep top talent. So you get what you deserve. Why do I say this, how
presumptuous of me, what evidence do I have to offer, explain yourself you
say…… That is just what I am about to do.
We have hinted that you cannot even describe or recognize
what top talent looks like. Now, we request that you take another look at the
job description, the basis for the job postings used to attract candidates. How
much are the posting about the work to be done, verses what the new hire will
gain from assuming the assignment. If you’re trying to attract quality people
why not place a quality posting? List what makes your company the employer of
choice, what is in it for them, why your organization, this assignment and the
career opportunities associated with the job opening reflect the best career move
for potential candidates. Evaluate the firm’s qualifications as an employer,
both the good and the not so good. Make sure your job posting communicates the true
competitive advantages your enterprise has to offer to top candidates.
Now that you have revamped your job postings and the
organization is beginning to attract top talent what is it like to be an applicant
for a job at your place of business? If you’re like most enterprises, you treat
job seekers like homeless people lined up for a soup kitchen hand out. They
wait in line for an opportunity and you feel their lucky to be considered.
What about the ones who make it past the initial resume screening
process? Are you going to have someone in HR arranging a telephone interview? How
exciting and rewarding for the outstanding applicant. They get to speak to
someone who has only a glimmer of what the job entails, no idea what success in
the assignment looks like, and is ignorant of the value there would be for them
to join the firm.
Now the hard part begins. HR discovers an outstanding
candidate who has taken the bait. So they contact the hiring manger to arrange
an interview. The hiring manager, when they submitted the job requisition emphasized
how urgent it was to fill the position. Therefore, the recruiter is excited to
call and inform the hiring manager that a highly qualified prospect is ready to
meet with them.
Unfortunately, for everyone involved, the hiring manager has
suddenly become distracted by another urgent business demand and cannot meet with
the applicant until possibly sometime in the future. Additionally, needs have
changed and the job requirements are now altered so the recruiting profile
needs to be adjusted. What do you communicate to the previously considered outstanding
candidate? If they are lucky, your HR department sends them a “Dear John” post
card. Something the former candidate will enjoy sharing with other outstanding
performers within their professional and personal network.
Finally, in spite of all the difficulties, a series of face
to face interviews is scheduled. Of course
there is no interview plan except maybe a schedule identifying when each person
is going to speak to the candidate. Unfortunately, there has been no effort to
convene the interview panel in advance to discuss the assignment, the
qualifications, the questions that each will ask, or how the interviewers will
compare notes on their impressions of the applicant.
However, it does not matter since almost everyone likes the
candidate. The lone objection appears to be based on the fact that the
candidate was not able to answer some silly question about the competitive
landscape and they could not remember their previous supervisor’s name. Funny,
because none of the references supplied by the candidate, appear to be former
bosses. No matter, it is important to fill the position soon and besides the
candidate did seem to know a lot about their prospective employer and they came
across as such a nice person. The kind everyone should enjoy working with. Well
that wraps up the new hire assessment process. Next, the offer and acceptance.
Now the fun part. Unknown to the HR department, the
candidate mentioned a desire to earn somewhere in the range between x and y dollars
with one of the interviewers. Despite
what was said, the response the candidate heard was that that they could
earn up to y dollars. Therefore, when an offer of x dollars was presented, the
candidate pointed out that they were led to believe that the salary would be y
dollars. And furthermore, they are being reasonable because they were expecting
an increase for the good work they were doing at their current employer. So,
under the circumstances, the demand for y dollars was fair. Of course the truth
was they had been let go by their previous employer. However since the candidate
was collecting a severance allowance they felt that they were on the former
employer’s payroll, which is the same as being employed, isn’t it?
So you tell me, did the firm hire a high potential employee?
Did the firm do a good job of investing in the recruiting process? Does this
case study seem oddly familiar? If so, what should be done at your company to
ensure that high quality personnel are hired, or does it really matter?
Wait, were not done. We have not even covered the on-barding
process. However, my phone is ringing, so I have to go. It’s that pesky supervisor
calling me again to help him fire someone who is not going to pass the
probationary period and he wants to replace them with someone who can do the work.
And the beat goes on….
From: Michael L. Salisbury at
