When an “A” Candidate Isn’t an “A” Employee

Has this ever happened? You screened hundreds of resumes, conducted extensive interviews, and found what you believed from the resume and interviews, the candidate that is perfect for the job. Exactly what you are looking for, maybe even better. You have high expectations for this new hire.

Then they come on board and fall flat on their face. Within 3 – 6 months you are saying to  yourself, “You’re NOT the person I hired” (a great title for a book).

You step back and start asking  yourself, “What went wrong? How could this have happened?”

Here is what went wrong – just because a person was a great CFO, operations manager, sales manager or VP HR, doesn’t mean they are the right CFO, operations manager, sales manager or VP HR.  This is the main premise of our Success Factor Methodology hiring process.

Hiring managers too often assume that because a person excelled at their last company, they did all these great things, they told you they could do your job, that this means the person will excel in your company. We believe this is where the concept, “past performance is a good indicator of future performance,” falls short. First off, it is only an indicator, nothing more. An indicator is not the right criteria for a good hire. Secondly, it also depends on how qualified the person interpreting the indicator is at interpreting the indicator. It has been our experience that most hiring managers are not competently trained in hiring or interviewing to do this. The few that are generally do hiring so rarely that they need a refresher course before starting the hiring process again.

There is a better way.

The Success Factor Methodology overcomes the biggest hiring mistakes that cause the problem.

Start by properly defining the job. This is the number one biggest hiring mistake companies make. They don’t properly define the job, so the whole hiring process is in jeopardy from the beginning. Since the job isn’t properly defined, then exactly what is the hiring manager screening and interviewing on or for? Generally background, experiences and skills.

This makes sense because that is exactly what most job descriptions are, simply a list of candidate attributes. Not a job description,  but rather a candidate description. This leads directly back to the problem. Hiring managers assume that  if they have this background they are an “A” candidate, and they may well be an “A” candidate. However, since the job isn’t properly defined, the real question “Will they be an “A” employee?” isn’t known.  This is the only thing you care about.

To properly define the actual job, start by defining outcomes. Ask yourself, “A year from now what will this person have done/accomplished in order to be considered a great hire?” or “What defines success in this role?” This is how we came up with the name, Success Factor Methodology. We simply started asking our search clients the questions, “What are the factors you will use to define success in this role?”  Once we had 4 or 5 of these we combined them into a Success Factor Snapshot. Now the Success Factor Snapshot becomes the job description. After all, this really is the actual job.

Once this is done, then go out and find a person that can explain how they will use their background, experiences and skills to deliver this success.

When you find a person that can explain how they will use their background, experiences and skills to deliver the 4 or 5 Success Factors, you have found both an “A” candidate and an “A” employee.

You can download some examples of Success Factor Snapshots for free to help you by CLICKING HERE.

Our best selling book, You’re NOT The Person I Hired, with over 10,000 copies in circulation, describes how you can implement the Success Factor Methodology. CLICK HERE for more details.

Join our Linkedin Hire and Retain Top Talent group for more discussions and articles on this topic. It is free to join just CLICK HERE.

Productivity. . . How far do we push?

A long time ago, before many executives reading this blog were born, I was in my first position after graduating from Engineering School. I was working in the aerospace industry on a military program. About three years into the project, things started heating up. We were “asked” (required really) to work six days a week to meet the contract obligations.

The company was very fair about this, paying time-and-a-half for the overtime hours even though we were salaried employees. And, in my opinion, they did not get anywhere near what they were paying for. After about three months of continuous overtime, I noticed that I and my colleagues were all putting off a bunch of stuff for “Saturday when it is quiet.” I don’t have hard data, but I’m pretty sure it’s accurate to say that it is likely that in the beginning, 48 hours of work was done in the 48 hours. But then it dropped to perhaps 40 hours of work done in 48 hours. I’m convinced that by the end of the twelve months of overtime, about 35 hours of work was being done in the 48 hours (even though we were being paid for 52 hours when you consider the time-and-a-half). This happened in a professional, white-collar workforce, not a unionized production line. While some of us enjoyed the extra pay, most of us would have rather had our weekends, so we did not intentionally slow down. We were simply burned out – not enough down time.

Today, in many companies, we are not asking or paying for overtime. However, we have asked those employees still with us to pick up the slack for those we’ve had to furlough, layoff, or force into early retirement. This has resulted in a steep increase in national productivity statistics. Many people seem to think that’s really great. I don’t.

While our employees may only be asked to work the standard 40 hours, they are either putting in extra time on their own to keep up with the load, or they are at the very least working quickly with little thought to quality or priorities. They just want to get the job done. The result, predictably, will be the same as it was in the ancient times when I was in aerospace. Burnout is bound to happen and productivity will take a dive – unless we, as forward thinking leaders, move to improve things.

There are many ways to make things a bit better. My favorite is to insist that people stop doing things – help them figure out what tasks they can safely let go without jeopardizing quality of products and services delivered to customers. Another might be to take this opportunity to move to a 4 day 40 hour work week. This is very attractive to many employees since it gives them a three day weekend. I know all the excuses for not doing this, but in general, they are simply excuses for not going through a change. We can make greater use of telecommuting so that folks can take small breaks between tasks. Another way is to begin hiring in part time folks to lessen the load (make sure you understand your state’s labor laws with respect to part time and independent consultants before moving forward with this). When things pick up, and the recovery is assured for you and your business, then you can increase the hours up to full employment.

It is best to address this challenge now rather than wait for your team to start burning out (if that hasn’t already begun). So what are your ideas? How can you make sure you avoid the difficult problem of rebuilding productivity after burnout?

You can download a free chapter on sourcing top talent from the best selling book, You’re NOT The Person I Hired, by CLICKING HERE.

About the author

Dave Kinnear is a sought after Business Advisor and Mentor.  He works with highly successful executives through one-to-one mentoring and coaching meetings. Individuals who are presently running successful businesses and executives in transition work with Dave to ensure meeting corporate and/or career goals. Through his affiliation with Vistage International, Dave convenes and facilitates Advisory Boards comprising Business Owners, Company Presidents and Chief Executives dedicated to becoming better leaders who make better decisions and achieve better results.

STOP Letting Job Descriptions Miss The Target

The Number ONE reason hiring fails for most companies is that success in the position is not defined!

In our research project, we documented that NOT defining Success was one of the Top Ten Hiring Mistakes made by hiring managers. Not only is it in the top ten, NOT Defining Success is most likely the number ONE culprit behind hiring mistakes and errors.

As we’ve pointed out in previous blog postings, using a traditional job description to both attract and measure candidates against in the interview process is worthless. Job descriptions define a person, not a job. Job descriptions categorize what people should have when they show up for work the first day, NOT what they should do with their skills, degrees, knowledge, experience, and behaviors.

A much better approach is to define the success you desire in a role. This can be done for any role in your organization, from the customer service rep position to the senior vice president of marketing. It is the core of our entire hiring process, the Success Factor Methodology. We’ve verified, validated, and field-tested the use of defining success to attract, assess, and retain top talent.

Over the last decade, thousands of companies around the world have defined success for positions in their companies. Through this simple exercise, they’ve increased hiring accuracy, improved execution of major projects, raised the reliability of obtaining important results, and strengthened the ability to retain top performers.

In our Success Factor Methodology, we call the end product of a definition of future success for a position – the Success Factor Snapshot. The process of building a Success Factor Snapshot is through S.O.A.R.ing. The SOAR process has 4 key components. You don’t have to be great at defining any of them – you just need to work through each one step-by-step. The 4 components of the SOAR job definition process include:

1. Situation – what’s not working or what is the missed opportunities?

2. Obstacles – what are the obstacles standing in the way of achieving the results

3. Action Steps – what are the quantifiable/time-based outcomes

4. Results – what specific results will tell us the situation/opportunity was achieved?

There is extensive information on our website of how to SOAR for a position, including the step-by-step process, products to teach all your hiring managers how to do it, services to help implement across your organization, and an extraordinary wealth of FREE Resources.

Brad and I have posted all our Internet Radio Show Programs in a FREE radio archive. We frequently talk about defining success and creating Success Factor Snapshots through the SOARing process. We’ve also posted real-life examples of Success Factor Snapshots.

If you use the SOAR process to develop Success Factor Snapshots and then use those in place of traditional job descriptions, you’ll immediately start attracting better quality candidates, you’ll make better assessments and evaluations of candidates in the interview process, and you’ll be able to keep your top performers engaged and excited about their jobs.

STOP using outdated tools, like the traditional job description, to define work. Use a tool that permits you to hit the target every time on hiring top talent.

Barry

Don’t forget to join our LinkedIn Discussion Group for Hiring Managers and Executives on how to hire and retain top talent.

Traditional Job Descriptions Worthless

Traditional job descriptions fail in hiring top talent!

In trainings, speeches, and engagements with clients, we start by shattering common assumptions about hiring. One of those assumptions is that job descriptions are useful documents in the hiring process. We contend that job descriptions are completely worthless.

“What do you mean, worthless? How can anybody hire with no job description? You’re crazy.”

Allow us to clarify.

We don’t mean that job descriptions have no value as legal or archival documents. Traditional job descriptions are worthless for hiring Top Talent.

Traditional job descriptions do not help you:

· align organizational goals with departmental goals or individual position goals

· create a roadmap for the hiring process

· clarify expectations

· generate a compelling marketing statement that will attract Top 5% Talent

· determine the best Sourcing Strategy to find and attract Top Talent

· assess and verify the quality and depth of candidate’s track record

· manage ongoing performance of a new hire

Traditional job descriptions simply lump together an amalgam of skills, knowledge, abilities, attributes, responsibilities, years of “qualifications” are static traits in isolation; they describe bits and pieces of the athlete, this is not to say they aren’t important skills, but they do not predict whether he will be able to effectively use those traits in the game situation to put the pigskin between the uprights, the puck in the net, or a ball over the outfield wall.

What counts most, in both sports and business, is not what traits you bring to the game, but what you can accomplish by using those traits. The coach cares whether an athlete can deliver results and help the team to win.

That is why coaches rely on scouts. The scout observes the athlete in the game, focusing solely on his or her ability to perform on the job with the rest of the team.

The Success Factor Methodology takes a coach’s perspective on hiring. It moves hiring out of the realm of static traits and into the realm of action and results.

Our research led to the development of the Success Factor Snapshot (SFS), which is the cornerstone of our methodology. This document, which replaces the traditional job description, is a tool that breaks down a position’s requirements in terms of specific, measurable deliverables, benchmarks, and timetables. We have examples, illustrations, FREE audio programs that describe the Success Factor Methodology, specifically building a Success Factor Snapshot in the FREE Resources Section of our Website.

Learn more how a Success Factor Snapshot compares and benchmarks to your current process of using job descriptions by taking advantage of our FREE Hiring Check-up.

Hiring Top Talent Requires a Process

We have discovered that in many companies the hiring process is random, unstructured, and often the people are not highly skilled at hiring. It is no wonder that for many companies hiring top talent is a challenge.

Most companies typically have very sophisticated processes and procedures for just about every activity except hiring. This in our opinion includes the Fortune 500. So often it is assumed that the hiring manager or a colleague has hired so many people they must be good. We conducted a recent, non-scientific survey of CEOs and Key Execs. We asked, “How many of you have audited, not co-interviewed, the hiring managers on your team to determine if they are competent to be interviewing?” Less than 5% responded positively.

This would never happen with any other activity in a company. This just validated why so often the wrong person gets through the hiring process.

All that’s required is a structured approach that enables companies to avoid the predictable pitfalls that plague many high-level hires. Based on our experience with hiring thousands of executives, we have developed The Success Factor Methodology that consists of eight distinct steps:

1. Build a multi-faceted Success Factor Snapshot to guide the entire
search process. (Click link for examples)
2. Implement a deep sourcing strategy to reach and attract selective
and sleeper candidates.
3. Identify and verify success prospects. Create a Compelling Marketing Statement (Click link for examples)
4. Create structured dossiers on selected candidates to enable objective,
unbiased evaluation and comparison.
5. Conduct Success Factor-based panel interviews using a
“magnifying glass” probe methodology.
6. Proactively address and overcome obstacles to hire throughout the
entire active interviewing process.
7. Streamline compensation and benefit negotiations through structured
interview-based preliminary groundwork.
8. Follow through on the hire with proven transition communication
and work style assessment, coaching and facilitation.

Together, these steps comprise the ‘Success Factor Methodology,’ a
proven process for improving your ability to find, recruit and hire top level
executive talent. Each step in the process requires the full collaboration
of stakeholders in all the business units affected by the potential
hire. When you employ the methodology in a consistent and systematic
manner, the outcome is a hire with a significantly increased probability of delivering the performance level you are seeking.

We welcome your thoughts and comments. Please let us know if this was helpful. If it was, please share with others.

We offer a complete library of free resources designed to assist our clients in improving their hiring. To browse the library just click the link.

Popular Webinar “You’re NOT the Person I Hired”

Back by popular demand, we will be hosting our “You’re NOT the Person I Hired” Webinar on June 19th, Friday 9 AM PST.

This is a one-hour overview of our Success Factor Methodology that we facilitate in a 3 hour in-house management workshop. The webinar is extremely popular. We’ve had over 10,000 people view this webinar program in the last 3 years.

After viewing this program, participants around the world tell us how just a few of the ideas and suggestions have resulted in dramatic improvements in hiring top talent at every level in their organization.

The one hour webinar covers the frustrations and mistakes all companies make in hiring, the 5 core steps of our proprietary and trademarked hiring methodology, and the key simple implementation points you can use to dramatically improve your hiring accuracy.

Learn how to raise hiring accuracy (which is for most execs and managers is below 50%) well into the 80%-9% range just by following a few simple steps.

This program is based on our research work of hiring best practices over 25 years, over 1000 search assignments, and well over 100,000 candidate interviews. It is also the title of our successful book by the same title. Over the last decade, over 40,000 hiring executives and managers around the world have seen and implemented our unique process for hiring top talent.

Due to the popularity of this program, it fills up quickly. The program is open to the first 50 Hiring Executives and Managers to register.

To register now and learn how to improve hiring accuracy and success CLICK HERE.

Barry

Hiring Frustration #1: What Am I Measuring?

Most Job Descriptions are Worthless as a tool for predicting future success!

MINIMUM EXPECTATIONS

Most job descriptions define nothing more than minimum, average, and mediocre standards. If the goal is to hire top talent, then you must be able to define the expectations of top talent. Consider the fact that the vast majority of job descriptions define years of experience needed in the job, minimum educational requirements, skills and knowledge needed, generic and undefined attributes and behaviors. This is not a job description. It has nothing to do with the job. It’s a people description. And the worst news of all is that it defines minimum-average-mediocre expectations not top talent expectations.

RANDOM RESULTS

Not only is this the NUMBER ONE frustration among hiring managers and executives, it is also the NUMBER ONE reason hiring fails. In presenting to over 30,000 hiring executives and managers in the last two decades, most of those workshop participants have told us their track record in hiring is abou 50/50. Sometimes they hire good people and sometimes they don’t.

How can you have any decent level of business success when you’re results are basically random. You might as well be standing at the crap tables in Vegas throwing dice. Is there any other process in your business where you will accept that level of random variability – such as your payroll checks or the bills you send to customers? Probably not! Then why do most managers and executives accept random results from hiring.

There are a number of reasons, but topping the list is the frustration and mistake over not defining success. Most hiring executives and managers would contend that they do not understand how to define results, expectations, outcomes, and deliverables that can be used as a predictive approach to determining the success of a potential candidate. Since most do not have a method for determing/defining success, they fall back on the tribal approach of using a traditional job description – a document that has existed from the early days of human resource management.

A BETTER APPROACH TO DEFINING SUCCESS

A better approach is to define outcomes, deliverables, and expectations that link back to the team, group, department, and company/organizational goals and objectives. NOT defining the outcomes is an abdication of strong management and leadership.

We use an approach in our Success Factor Methodology called S.O.A.R, which provides a structured approach to defining success. After having “field-tested” this approach and methodology for the last two decades, we’ve seen thousands of companies dramatically improve their hiring accuracy and ability to hire candidates who deliver the results desired.

RESOURCES TO HELP YOU GET STARTED IN DEFINING SUCCESS

Our S.O.A.R. template can help guide you through the process of defining success for any role within your company.

There are multiple FREE examples of Success Factor Snapshots using the S.O.A.R. approach in our FREE Resources Library.

In our Internet Radio Programs for Hiring Managers, Tele-Conferences, and Webinars, Brad and are constantly sharing ideas, thoughts, and strategies around using Success-based Job Definitions to improve hiring and retention. Take a look at some of the FREE downloads in our Hiring Manager Audio Library.

DOES YOUR COMPANY HAVE WHAT IT TAKES TO HIRE TOP TALENT?

Does your company define quantifiable and time-based outcomes, deliverables, and expectations before the first candidate is interviewed, let alone hired?

Traditional Job Descriptions Don’t Attract Top Talent

Over the last 20 plus years of recruiting, we have reviewed hundreds of job descriptions from a wide variety of companies and for a wide variety of positions. The vast majority of these job descriptions have the same format. They list the responsibilities, duties and experience required. It is a one size-fits-all, generic job description. Traditional job descriptions are useful documents that meet legal requirements, but they should not be used for hiring purposes.

There are two reasons why these job descriptions are ineffective as a hiring tool. The first reason is traditional job descriptions describe the minimal qualifications required for the position, such as minimal education, minimal years of experience, and minimal skills. This often leads to hiring the least qualified from the pool of qualified candidates. The harsh reality is when you define a job in mediocre terms, odds are you will attract and hire mediocre candidates.

The second reason is traditional job descriptions fail to focus on what defines success in this role. Most people would agree that a person who just performs the duties and responsibilities outlined in traditional job descriptions would rarely be considered a success. In fact, most candidates would not last long in a company that is growing and outpacing the competition. Just because the person has the experience listed doesn’t mean they can deliver the desired results. Here’s the misnomer, past experiences are a good indicator of future performance. Past experience is actually a poor indicator of performance. Past performance is a better indicator, but the best indicator is their ability to deliver results in your company. After all, you are hiring for your company, not for what they did at a past company. Of all the traditional job descriptions reviewed over the years, few if any mention future expectations.

For example, how many times have you heard someone say: “We’re looking for a VP Operations” The reply is “What are you looking for.” The typical answer is usually, “We need a person with 10 years experience, 5 years in our industry, team leader, strategic thinker, good communications and an MBA is preferred.” This is all about the person and nothing about what defines success in the role or what the person is expected to deliver once they come on board. It is naturally assumed if the person has the experience mentioned, they can deliver the expected results. It is our contention that experience has nothing to do with delivering results. Just because the person was a great VP of Operations at their last company, doesn’t mean they are the right VP of Operations for your company.

Instead of using the traditional job description, we recommend using our Success Factor Snapshot (SFS.) This snapshot is a list of Success Factors. Success Factors are simply the results you want this person to deliver, in order for you, the hiring manager, to consider this person a successful hire.

Taking our example of a VP Operations, our Success Factor Snapshot would define the Success Factors the VP needs to deliver – usually within the next 12 to 18 months. For example, the SFS would read:

Within the first 30 days develop a plan of action that will improve on time deliveries from 85% to 96% and present the plan to the CEO.

Within 6 months, develop and begin implementing a vendor qualifications program that will insure zero defects and 100% on-time deliveries from vendors.
Within 9 months consolidate the operations of two plants and produce a cost savings of at least 15%.
We would continue developing these Success Factors until we have 5 or 6 that clearly define what is expected of the candidate once they come on board.

Now when asked the question “What are you looking for.” The answer is “ we need someone who can improve on time deliveries to 96%, can implement a vendor qualifications program and consolidate operations with at least a 15% cost savings.” Instead of defining experience, you are defining success in this role.

We believe that if you find a person that can accomplish these Success Factors, you’ve found the person with the right experience.

Using the Success Factor Snapshot as a hiring guide sets the stage for a successful hire. Instead of the traditional job description, the Success Factor Snapshot clearly states expectations and lets the candidate know what is expected of them once they come on board. The SFS defines success in the role, not minimum qualifications. After all isn’t that what you really want to hire.

For more examples on this go to IMPACT Hiring Solutions

Eliminate Candidate Embellishment

While not every candidate is guilty of puffery, we know from experience that it happens. Candidates claim responsibility for accomplishments that really were not their accomplishments, but rather those of bosses, peers, or perhaps even subordinates.

There is a bulletproof solution to the problem of “accomplishment inflammation,” and that is to become a great detective. When you learn to probe every answer for relevant details, you’ll discover what we have: There hasn’t been a candidate born who can make up false answers quickly enough. They’ve either done what they say they’ve done and can describe it in infinite detail, or they will implode in the chair right in front of you (and it’s messy when it happens).

Every time you ask a candidate a question based on examples, expect to spend fifteen to thirty minutes exploring the details of each example. Put the candidate’s answer under a magnifying glass, and ask for multiple examples to make sure something wasn’t an anomaly.

Every interview will be different, but no matter what example is being discussed, your probes will generally follow the time-honored journalist’s “5 Ws”:
• Who?
• What?
• When?
• Where?
• Why?
• For good measure, throw in How? (Yes, even though it is not a W.)

Train yourself to have a knee-jerk reaction to high-level, nonspecific answers. Usually, it’s not that the candidate is trying to deceive you; it’s that he or she simply hasn’t thought to give concrete, detailed answers. You can help the candidate along by following up assertions and blanket statements with one of the following Magnifying Glass questions:
• “Could you give me an example of that?”
• “Can you be more specific about that?”
• “Can you give me a bit more information about that?”
• “What were the most important details about that situation?”
• “What was your responsibility within the project team?’
• “What did you personally do to ensure that success?”
• “Who else was involved in that project?”
• “Why did you take that approach on the project?”
• “Why did you pick those individuals to be on the team?”
Get all the details. Dates, numbers, names of people, schedules. Both of you will be helping each other to get to the facts faster and with more relevance.

Other good Magnifying Glass questions:
• What was your role in the project?
• What success was achieved?
• How did you decide what to do?
• Can you give me a few examples of your personal initiative on the project?
• When have you faced a comparable challenge?
• Where did the resources come from to get that accomplished?
• How were parameters for the project set?
• Would you consider that process a success? Why or why not? (Remember, even a failure has value)
• When have you failed to meet your boss’s expectations?
• How did the team make mid-course corrections?
• What did you learn specifically?
• With benefit of hindsight, what would you do differently next time?

Keep going until you know what you need to know (or until it becomes apparent the candidate is being elusive or downright lying. If this happens, it’s time to cut and run.) Whatever you do, don’t give in and assume it’ll work out. Some candidates are great about changing the subject and making you think you got enough information. Be sure to make a note of what happened and then move on.

When the pool of talent is narrowed down to the final two candidates, it’s time for the interview team to come up with homework assignments. An important predictor of how a candidate will adapt to your organization’s environment is to see an example of his or her thought processes, analytical skills, and problem-solving, up close and personal.

Effective homework assignments are projects of reasonable size and scope that involve one of the most critical Success Factors listed in your Success Factor Snapshot. The candidate should be given all the support he or she needs to adequately answer the question or complete the assignment. The candidate should then return to the interview panel and present results and conclusions, and lead a question and answer discussion based on the homework. No matter what functional area, homework should entail questioning, analysis, research, and a panel discussion with some form of presentation.

While homework assignments are “out there” in the hiring world, some candidates may object to doing what they perceive as unpaid work.

Most Top 5% Talent, because of their self-motivated nature, will be intrigued and embrace the challenge. But if they’ve had previous encounters with unscrupulous employers who actually do assign homework and go on to use candidate ideas (even though they did not hire the candidate) you’ll need to reassure them that you aren’t asking them to come up with the “right answer.” Instead, you are looking for a concrete example of their approach to problems, their analytical and presentation skills, and their ability to synthesize information.

The scope of homework should be appropriate; that is, you shouldn’t ask candidates to dedicate forty hours on nights and weekends to solving your most pressing problem as “homework.” Make it clear at the outset that the homework is not going to be as deep as the actual job, and that you aren’t looking so much for their answer as for deep insight into their thought and action processes.