2. The job description should DESCRIBE the job, not the skills required for the job. Many job descriptions, especially those in technology, list required skills and technologies, but never mention that you will be developing a critical new Point of Sale application or that a majority of the work is simply maintaining existing code. Because technology matures so rapidly, candidates usually have a greater interest in HOW technology is being used than in a particular version of software, which will be obsolete in a few months.

Why does a company require 5 to 7 years accounting experience? How exactly is this level of accounting expertise going to be used on the job? Is the position simply running reports – or is the emphasis on analysis and critical thinking? A great job description helps the candidate “see” the day-to-day activities of the position. Another way to help the candidate better understand the position is to break the job down into parts: 50% second-level technical assistance with the Fortune 500 clients, 20% research and bug resolution, 25% remote and class room training for new employees, 5% administrative reports.

3. If properly written, an excellent job description can be the basis for future performance reviews. A performance-based job description highlights the most important deliverables and how success will be measured in time and output. Performance-based job descriptions help frame the interview and provide a context to discuss expected behaviors for superior performance. An effective performance-based job description will help attract A Players and screen out lower performers.

Malcolm’s Comments

All aspects of our society are undergoing a kind of collective crisis when it comes to hiring. That relates to something I call the “mismatch problem.” So what is the mismatch problem? It is when the criteria we use to prepare to assess someone’s ability to do a job are radically out-of-step with the actual demands of the job itself.Turns out, there are mismatch problems wherever you look these days in the professions. Let’s start with the biggest and most serious case – teachers. What is the best way to ensure that teachers are of top quality? You want to ensure that they are top quality. You want to get the best-educated, smartest, most experienced people possible into the classroom.

We raise the bar, really dramatically on a number of academic levels because we felt that was the surest way to ensure that we had better quality teachers in the classroom. What is the relationship between those kinds of credentials and teacher quality? There isn’t any. So why do mismatch problems exist?

There are two reasons. One has to do with our desire for certainty. All of the things that we do in scouting combines – and with certification for teachers – and test scores for law students – they all have the same thing in common. They are the hard, objective, reliable standardized predictors of performance. But the truth is, in all of those cases, if you want to know how good someone is, those kinds of hard objective, seemingly useful statistics are not useful at all.

All you can do when it comes to lawyers and teachers and professional quarterbacks, if you want to know how good they are, is to wait until they actually do the job. Analyze them when they are on their job and use your own subjective evaluation.

It is a case in which we are drawn to these kinds these objective standardized measures. We have a desire to impose certainty on something that is inherently uncertain. And that is why we get these mismatches.

Mitch’s comments

Gladwell highlights a typical hiring strategy – “You want to get the best-educated, smartest, most experienced people possible” to “ensure that we had better quality teachers in the classroom.” On the surface, the three criteria (best-educated, how smart they are, their experience level) seem plausible for candidate screening. But let’s look deeper.

Education is a valid consideration, and any position will have an established threshold. However, our education only underscores what we know. A teacher’s education will not predict how they will organize a lecture, convey information, our how they connect, engage and motivate a student – all tenants of an effective educator.

How smart we are is a weak predictor. Studies have shown that our IQ contributes only about 10% to 15% towards our success. While our social and emotional intelligence has a much stronger proven correlation to our success, our IQ is one of the least likely predictors. This is a big surprise to hiring managers.

Experience is also a tricky one. We all know mediocre engineers, analysts, car mechanics and leaders that have 10 or 15 years experience. But do they have necessary job competencies like Initiative, Integrity, and Organizational Commitment? Probably not. Many companies have “rookie” awards. They focus on results and not tenure. In the 90’s, I filled in one semester at Texas Christian University, while they were completing their search for a full-time professor. At the end of the semester, students had the opportunity to grade the instructor in 17 areas. For my first teaching gig, I was pleased to receive higher scores in 15 areas that compared my effectiveness to other instructors on campus. Enthusiasm and a deep desire to develop others rendered neutral my experience deficit.

Gladwell states that “we raise the bar, really dramatically on a number of academic levels because we felt that was the surest way to ensure that we had better quality teachers in the classroom.” So, why do institutions of learning engage in such misguided missions? Why do all those really smart educated people do such really dumb things? The answer highlights the inherent difficulty of the hiring process and underscores a universal mistake most companies fall prey to in their hiring decisions. Hiring decisions are made on assumptions not fully vetted in the interview. This increases the risk of hiring a “mismatch.” To mitigate risk and save time, a shortcut strategy is used.

• An internal referral of a candidate is one of the most popular ways to reduce risk. Referral cuts the hiring risk by 40%.
• They have 8 years of industry experience. Reduced training and quicker ramp up time reduced the hiring risk by 15%
• They have worked for a reputable competitor for 4 years. The competitor is known for its tough standards. Competitor experience reduces the hiring risk by another 15%.
• They have recent certification in a highly desired skill and belong to a local user group. The certification and local user group reduces the hiring risk by 10%.
• The candidate graduated from the same university as the hiring manager and had the same Marketing professor. This is good karma and must count for something. Let’s give them a 5% risk reduction.
• We didn’t talk to a reference, but their letter of recommendation was glowing. How about another 5% reduction?

Our risk reducing strategy has reduced our chances of hiring a “mismatch” by a whopping 90%. We are betting on the risk reduction strategy as the “surest way to ensure” the right person is hired. While the internal referral, industry experience with the competitor and certification should be factored into the hiring decision (maybe 25% to 30%) a more complete picture of the candidate is required. Our candidate has a lot going for them, but upon critical analysis the only thing we are 90% sure of is that the candidate can do the job. Like Gladwell’s teacher example, we have only uncovered their credentials. We do not yet have evidence the candidate will do their tasks exceedingly well. We still might be hiring a dud.

We need to discover the candidate’s most likely pattern of behavior to support our decision. Uncovering behavior is typically done through a formal behavioral interview, which is sometimes augmented by third-party assessments. A behavioral interview draws from the past to uncover a candidate’s actions. A candidate might be asked to share a particularly stressful situation. What actions did they take and what were the results? The answers could provide insight into how they handle stress, their style of teamwork and cooperation, their ability to persuade others, or their analytical thinking. Through a series of probing questions we start to get a better picture of how the candidate might behave in our environment.

The more we know about what drives the success of our current employees, the better we can craft interview questions to determine if there is a match or mismatch of candidates in the hiring process. Over time, we will develop a rich understanding of the “hard, objective, reliable standardized predictors of performance” required for our company’s success.

All aspects of our society are undergoing a kind of collective crisis when it comes to hiring. That relates to something I call the “mismatch problem.” So what is the mismatch problem? It is when the criteria we use to prepare to assess someone’s ability to do a job is radically out-of-step with the actual demands of the job itself.Turns out, there are mismatch problems wherever you look these days in the professions. Let’s start with the biggest and most serious case – teachers. What is the best way to ensure that teachers are of top quality? You want to ensure that they are top quality. You want to get the best-educated, smartest, most experienced people possible into the classroom.

We raise the bar, really dramatically on a number of academic levels because we felt that was the surest way to ensure that we had better quality teachers in the classroom. What is the relationship between those kinds of credentials and teacher quality? There isn’t any. So why do mismatch problems exist?

There are two reasons. One has to do with our desire for certainty. All of the things that we do in scouting combines – and with certification for teachers – and test scores for law students – they all have the same thing in common. They are the hard, objective, reliable standardized predictors of performance. But the truth is, in all of those cases, if you want to know how good someone is, those kinds of hard, objective, seemingly useful statistics are not useful at all.

All you can do when it comes to lawyers and teachers and professional quarterbacks, if you want to know how good they are, is to wait until they actually do the job. Analyze them when they are on their job and use your own subjective evaluation.

It is a case in which we are drawn to these kinds these objective standardized measures. We have a desire to impose certainty on something that is inherently uncertain. And that is why we get these mismatches.

Mitch’s Comments
I agree with Gladwell’s assertion that the criteria used to assess someone’s hire-ability is “radically out-of-step with the actual demands of the job itself.” However, being an HR professional and a strong believer in systems and processes, I take exception to his universal dismissal of “hard, objective standardized predictors of performance.” There is an antidote to the mismatch problem.The failure of most companies their lack of development, recruiting, and screening against the proper objective standardized performance predictors. To use a sports metaphor, they showed up wearing the right uniforms, but they are playing on the wrong field. How does this happen? The lack of investment in time and effective hiring processes are often the culprit.

There are multiple strategies for pinpointing and hiring superior performers. I evangelize screening against a handful of critical competencies required for the “superior” status. Yep, it takes time and money to develop a competency model – a group of competencies, that when bundled together, reflects the attributes of a superior performer. And it takes commitment and discipline to implement the competency model strategy. While any hiring process remains imperfect, the competency model process does minimize a “mismatch.”

Here are the components of developing and implementing a competency model strategy.

1. Work with your current top performers to benchmark their success. There are 26 common job competencies. Pick the top six, that when bundled together, equates to a superior performer. As an example, in an exercise with a group of 40 business analysts, a democratic vote determined the competency model for a superior business analyst. The primary (threshold) competencies in order of popularity were: Analytical Thinking, Customer Service Orientation, Flexibility, Information Seeking, and Initiative. Secondary competencies included Teamwork and Cooperation and Achievement Orientation. A competency model for a superior trainer would require a different set of competencies: Developing Others, Persuasion, Integrity, and Self Control. Every position has a select group of behaviors and associated competencies.
2. Once the competences are agreed upon, then behavioral interview questions are developed. Behavioral questions are asked to identify desired behaviors related to superior performance. To uncover initiative a candidate could be asked: Provide an example of a time you felt like you worked hard, maybe beyond your normal capacity, to complete an assignment, or reach a goal.
3. Secondary probing questions are asked to verify the breath and depth of knowledge or passion for a certain area. Examples to use for Initiative: What motivated to you? What were the results? Answers to first question and probing secondary questions will provide enough data to “score” the candidate.
4. A Candidate Scorecard will signify where the candidate falls between the continuum of Expert Capability and Minimal Capability.
5. The interviewing team compares scores and come up with a final score for each candidate.
6. Highest score gets the offer

That is the beginning of the process. 30 days and 90 days later, a performance appraisal should be administered using the same competencies. Think of it as a check and balances to verify the accuracy of your interview system. Based on their performance, were your initial scores correct on the interview scorecard? Were they accurate predictors of success? If not, review the interview questions and make adjustments to the questions and probing secondary questions in future interviews.While many companies are misguided in their use of “hard, objective standardized predictors of performance,” a more thoughtful investigation of their superior employees and proper implementation of a competency-based system minimize the “missteps.”

A helpful resource for competency models is InterviewRX. Two chapters are dedicated to job competencies, developing competency models and associated interview questions and candidate scorecards. I have found the competency interview system moves companies closer to the tipping point of success. ]]> http://www.interviewrx.com/2008/07/11/hiring-tips-selecting-the-right-performance-predictors/feed/ 0 http://www.interviewrx.com/2008/05/19/speed-interviewing-coming-to-a-company-near-you/ http://www.interviewrx.com/2008/05/19/speed-interviewing-coming-to-a-company-near-you/#comments Tue, 20 May 2008 05:36:48 +0000 Mitch Byers http://interviewrx.com/?p=100 A recent article from Dr. John Sullivan discusses up an emerging trend – speed interviewing. Speed Interviewing takes its name from the once popular, Speed Dating. Speed Interviewing severely compresses the interviewing process. Compare cooking popcorn the old fashion way – heating up oil in a deep pan and adding a shallow layer of popcorn to today’s fast and easy microwave popcorn. The popcorn today is ready in jiffy with no mess or cleanup. Speed interviewing hopes to achieve the same results: faster and easier without all the messy protocols of a traditional interview. The slimmed down version is making inroads because traditional interviews has several problems:

1. Traditional interviews demand time from multiple parties, impacting production activities
2. Most managers would rather do ANYTHING other than interview someone they have never met
3. Many managers have little to no training in the interview process
4. Many hiring decisions are seen as a 50/50 crap shot, no matter how much time you spend trying to analyze the candidate
5. Many hiring managers believe their intuition is the most valid measuring stick to make hiring decisions

The article supports the point of psychologist John Gottman, whose research in the dynamics of snap decisions and first impressions is discussed in Malcom Gladwell’s best-seller Blink. Gladwell explains how “thin slicing” videotaped interactions between married couples provided Gottman the ability to predict, with 95% accuracy, the long-term outcome of the marriage.

While Gottman is able to rationalize a relationship in a matter of seconds, Dr. Sullivan’s approach is more akin to speed dating, and suggests setting a time limit between 5 and 15 minutes for the interview. This caught my interest, because when I was conducting research for InterviewRX I found a study that concluded most hiring decisions are made between 4 and 10 minutes into the interview. This coalescing research suggests speed interviewing may be valid for some companies.

Sullivan points to several advantages of speed interviewing:

1. It provides for an immediate comparison between candidates. In the morning you can interview the slate of candidates and have an offer ready that afternoon.
2. Less time is spent with people you know you will never hire.
3. If available, you are able to interview more than 2 or 3 people with the best resumes.
4. Hiring managers are more willing to interview people if they know they can get in and out and on with their day.
5. Most hiring managers don’t enjoy a formal behavioral interview and prefer to go with their gut. Hiring managers are proud of their ability to ready body language and understand emotional nuances. They don’t need an hour to figure out if they can work with someone.
6. Speed interviewing appeals to college students and recent graduates.
7. Because of the time constraints, overly prepared candidates have to abandon their canned answers and respond off the cuff, providing the hiring manager with a truer assessment.

While speed interviewing is not yet fully embraced in HR and recruiting circles, there are enough companies using or experimenting with the concept to rethink your interview approach. From the hiring perspective, committing to a hiring decision after a ten-minute conversation is pretty gutsy, but one most of us do internally, even if we don’t make our decision “public” that soon.

Sullivan mentions that IBM, Abbott Labs and Texas Instruments are using Speed Interviewing, though no specifics are given. My personal opinion is that companies will be reluctant to embrace a snap judgment platform, but may follow the pattern used by Tower Consultants. An employee from Tower shares the company speaks with as many as fifty prospective candidates in a day, allotting about 5 minutes with each one. The speed interviewing is the first step. A more rigorous technical and behavioral interview follows before a hiring decision is made. In my own experience, initial phone interviews have become considerably shorter over the years. Today, I allow 5 to 7 minutes to capture essential qualifying information. From there, face-to-face interviews are scheduled.

The bottom line for Tower and a growing number of companies is that the “speed interviewing works” and I believe it will be a trend more and more people in job transition will experience.

The Solution
99% of participants in a 2007 study felt like the best remedy was to expose and teach students a variety of skills that would allow the U.S. to compete globally in the future. While there was a consensus of significant improvements needed in reading, science and math, employers had a bias towards applied skills such as critical thinking and problem solving, teamwork and collaborating, leadership and diversity.

Top 10
Here is the Top 10 list of skills employees are expected to need over the next five years

1. Critical Thinking and Problem Solving
2. Information Technology Application
3. Teamwork and Collaboration
4. Creativity and Innovation
5. Diversity
6. Leadership
7. Oral Communications
8. Professionalism and Work Ethics
9. Ethics and Social Responsibility
10. Written Communications

Action Plan for Job Seekers
During the interview process, job seekers can probe to find out what the company needs. What skills is the company lacking? What is impacting their competitiveness or slowing their growth? What critical elements are needed to complete their team? Chances are good the skill needed can be found on the Top 10 list. Think about your own strengths and experiences. What are your top two or three strengths that will add value to the company? Working with your strengths, develop brief concise stories you can share that will help the hiring manager “see” you as having expertise in these areas. If there is a solid match between their needs and the values you offer, then the hiring decision has just become an easy choice.

Once hired, learn more about which skills you will need for continued success.  Invest in continued education to hone your skills and erase any significant deficits that may impede your career growth. It is always better to be part of the solution rather than be perceived as part of the problem.

1)    Analysis of Your Current Job Search. Your job search can be an emotional roller coaster that can span over several months. Tracking your contacts and activities provides a realist assessment of your progress. Are you developing a large enough network to effectively penetrate the market? Your contacts and call activity will help you analyze if you are spending too much time on the job boards and not enough time connecting with people who can help you move forward in the job search.

Tracking your calls and contacts can be accomplished with a simple spreadsheet. To compliment your tracking system, you will also want to organize the business cards you will be receiving. Purchasing an organizer from the office supply store or scanning the cards and setting up electric files works well.

2)   “Off the Market” Notification. At the end of your current job search, you will want to contact individuals on your list to notify them of your new position that you are “off the market.” This professional courtesy is one not often provided. However, this personal touch will help keep you in good standing for future contacts.

3)    Continue to build your network in your new position. When you are ready to move towards your next career position you can revisit your previous contacts and mine the data. Reestablishing contact with your known sources can quickly expand your opportunities and reduce your time in job transition.

Expanding and tracking your network during your job transition is a good idea with plenty of tangible benefits. Your documentation will keep you grounded and moving in the right direction. Long-term, you can continue to build your database to support future career moves.

1. Planning – lack of planning translates into poor outcome
2. Three-way Meeting – A meeting between the recruiter, HR partner, and the hiring manger is critical in developing a good job description
3. Help your recruiter learn what “good” looks like – This might include talking to the best folks in the department or the top performers on the team
4. Avoid Common Pitfalls: Changes to the original job description; Relying too heavily on industry experience; Focusing too heavily on time-to-fill
5. Communicate, Communicate, Communicate (self explanatory)
6. Remove Roadblocks – specifically reduce lengthy interview cycles and make sure interview teams are all on the same page
7. Selling the opportunity

• The CEO, not HR, must lead topgrading. (page 66)
• Hiring managers must fully “own” topgrading results, including hiring decisions. (page 70)
• HR’s role is to be the “right arm” of the CEO and support topgrading throughout the organization. HR and recruiters must “sell, cajole, challenge, coach, and browbeat their client managers to topgrade.” (page 74)

An “A Players’ is defined as one who qualifies among the top 10 percent of those available for a position. An A Player is best of class. Tony leads a retained search firm in Dallas and is definitely an A Player.

I am up to page 70, so can not yet provide a full opinion of the book. However, I was intrigued to learn that A Players make up only 25% of most company’s workforce. The balance of the workforce are divided into 3 categories:

• 25% chronic B Players
• 25 % chronic C Players
• 25% B/Cs who are able to become A players, after develop or redeployment into a more suitable position.

1. Needle in a haystack—it’s great fun to find a wonderful candidate who makes a real difference when hired.
2. Need to pay the rent—most of us need income. Along the way we’ve found that we’re good at this gig. It pays the bills
3. Order out of chaos—20 to 30 plus requisitions, countless resumes to review, tons of voice mail, endless emails, visits from desperate hiring managers, the list goes on and on. Most of us thrive in an environment where there is just way more to do than could be done every day.
4. Trust the process—unless you’re from the throw as much *!&# against the wall and see what sticks crowd, most highly successful recruiters know what works and make sure they’re doing enough of the right kinds of activities to keep the machine running.
5. Gotta Play on a team—some folks are happy working from home but most of us get our jollies working closely with others. There’s a lot to be gained by being part of an organization. You have to love walking through the office and seeing all those smiling faces of people you placed and their totally satisfied managers who see you as a valuable business partner.
6. Art and science—finding wonderful candidates by using innovative sourcing techniques is invigorating. This is the same thrill as gold prospectors must feel when they hit the mother load.
7. Technology junkie—lots of us just love technology. Why do the same mundane task day in and day out if you can automate it? How many ways can you be connected?
8. Love to network—it may be working a room at a trade event, making phone calls, IMing, emailing, Googleing, or blogging but we just love to network with people
9. Share the wealth—working with new people, showing them the ropes and cultivating talent is truly rewarding.
10. Doing the impossible—we’ve all had that impossible to fill position. Who doesn’t want to be Superman or Superwoman? Defying the odds and making it happen is the best rush there is.

I don’t know Simon, but based on his list, I’d say he is an A Player.