Taking a fresh look at your screening process

Posted on July 18, 2011 by Dana Harrison

We’re in the middle of a project with a large company who has engaged us to help reduce first-year turnover through improving their applicant screening process. The company has many complexities to it and our work is focused on discoveries and recommendations that are specific to them. However, the general structure of this project is applicable for any review of a screening process. Consider the following 3 questions when thinking about the strength of your process:

1) Are we clearly and comprehensively capturing the expectations of a position? Are all relevant parties in agreement about what is expected of an employee in a position? Are the expectations documented? Are we clear about the overall expectations as well as the “dealbreakers” that must be explored during hiring? HINT: Oftentimes, what is expected of employees is scattered across many documents (job description, values statement, Key Performance Requirements, competencies, evaluations, etc.) as well as in the minds of stakeholders. In order to effectively screen candidates, it’s critical that the bottom-line expectations be determined and explored.

2) Does our screening process explore the critical expectations in a way that gives us meaningful information about the candidate? Are we asking questions that get to the heart of critical information, or are we just gathering interesting information? Do those involved in the process know what they’re looking for? Do we know what to listen for after we ask a question? Do our hiring assessments provide meaningful insights, or just interesting information? HINT: The questions we ask (or other means of collecting information) directly relate to the expectations for the position…you can’t have meaningful probing without clear expectations.

3) Does our applicant screening process connect us with top candidates and provide a positive candidate experience? Do our job postings speak to the people we want to apply? How early in the process do candidates get an accurate picture of the position and what it means to be a part of our company? Does our candidate screening process turn off top candidates? Do our communications (including our website) accurately portray our culture? HINT: Go through your own hiring process sometime and see what you notice (or ask a friend to).

Try not to be intimidated by asking these questions. Many times we find that our clients don’t need a massive overhaul of their hiring process, just a few tweaks in the right places. If you’re at the place where you’d like an outside party to review your process, make recommendations and help you implement possible changes, let me know – we’d love to help out.

Dealing with candidate photos and other sticky situations

Posted on April 13, 2011 by Dana Harrison

I really appreciated the 10-minute podcast via ERE.net on What’s Worrying Recruiters About Social Media. Keith Watts, an employment law attorney with Ogletree Deakins, discusses what it means to “do the right thing” when it comes to using Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter.

To sum it up, he repeatedly emphasizes the importance of:

Consistency in the hiring process across the company;
Making hiring decisions based on job-related factors.

Here at ADVISA, we work with clients on both of these fronts. We ask: “Are best hiring practices in place and consistently used across the company?” Right now I’m working on projects with two major clients where we are helping them improve their process for the purpose of increasing efficiency and effectiveness with screening, but we’ll also help train people across each company so that the established processes are consistent. After all, a great process is meaningless if it’s not put into practice well!

As part of the needs analysis we do to determine if work on hiring processes is merited, here are some questions we ask:

What is the role of HR in hiring? The role of the hiring manager?
At what stage is the hiring manager involved in selection?
What is the typical time-to-fill?
What is the candidate experience?
Where is there frustration? Inefficiency?
What is the turnover rate? How does the company feel about that rate?

These kinds of questions can lead to the identification of areas where consistency can be improved.

When it comes to defining the needs of the position, here are some of the signs we see that indicate that positions are not as clearly defined and they need to be. These are signs that there is ambiguity about the job-related factors on which selection decisions are made during candidate screening:

Feedback on candidates is vague. (“She didn’t seem like a fit for us.”)
Feedback on candidates is inconsistent.
The company can offer no description of how this person will have to interact with the team/supervisor in order to be successful.
Descriptions of multiple positions sound virtually the same.

Did you ask yourself the process-related questions above? Did you squirm as you thought about the answers? If so, contact me and we’ll work through some more exploration with you and take a look at how we can help. And if you have signs of ambiguity about what a position requires, beware…those situations are the ones that get companies into trouble because they open the door for decisions to be made on factors such as race, age and gender, which (among other categories) are not permissible. We’d be happy to help you gain clarity into what is required for given positions at your company, as well as how to screen for these traits.

Quality, Cost or Compliance – What drives your recruiting?

Posted on March 22, 2011 by Dana Harrison

What’s your answer? Quality of the hire? Cost to make the hire? Compliance with all laws and policies?

The article “What Drives Your Company’s Hiring Process: Quality, Cost, or Compliance?” captured my attention today for the initial question it asks. But I’m compelled to write about this as well because the article so accurately captures the philosophy we take on best hiring practices, including how we counsel our consulting clients and how we manage searches in our RPO (Recruitment Process Outsourcing) service.

If you’re interested in changing your hiring practices in order to better balance these factors, or you want to hand off hiring to someone who will take care of searches for you in this model, I’d love to chat with you. In the meantime, I hope you find the article to be thought-provoking.

What kind of experience are your candidates having?

Posted on March 22, 2011 by Dana Harrison

Three cheers for the article “Pointing the Way to the Candidate Experience“!

As mentioned in the article, with unemployment still above 9%, this is an easy time to dismiss the candidate experience as unimportant. After all, with so many candidates out there, anyone you engage with at all ought to consider themselves lucky and candidates should recognize that they’re just one of a gazillion resumes you’ve received, right?

Going back to last summer, I wrote a blog called “Time is Still Ticking“, in which I talk about one aspect of the candidate experience: the time that elapses between contacts from the potential employer how that impact on candidates. We’ve continued to see top candidates disappear when employers drag out the process and, in particular, don’t stay in contact with the candidate. It is quite unfortunate to see a a potentially great hire fall apart because basic communication resulted in a negative candidate experience.

In “Pointing the Way to the Candidate Experience“, the author highlights what candidates are seeking. “A survey by Shaker Consulting Group confirms just how little window shopping job seekers expect. Job descriptions, a place to apply, contact information. Once they actually apply, what they really want is an acknowledgment, a timeline, and to know where they stand, or at least when the job was filled.”

The good news is that candidates aren’t really looking for that much. And there’s more good news…if your company isn’t provided great candidate experiences, the fixes are likely not that complicated or expensive. At ADVISA, we can help you examine your candidate experience and other barriers you may be having to doing great hiring. Here’s a sampling of how we’ve helped other clients with their hiring process, and simultaneously improved the client experience:

Revising job description formats so that the job description is clear, accurate and meaningful.
Writing authentic, but compelling job postings that capture the attention of the right kind of candidates.
Using Predictive Index® to benchmark the difficult-to-define behaviors that are critical for a position and then carrying forward that critical information into job descriptions and job postings.
Taking on searches through our RPO (Recruitment Process Outsourcing) service where our staff ensures that all candidates receive the level of communication they are seeking.

We’d be happy to take a look at your hiring processes from the perspective of a candidate and to partner with you to enhance your hiring – contact me and we’ll get started!

Self-awareness…it’s importance and assessing candidates for it

Posted on February 10, 2011 by Dana Harrison

Self-awareness. To what extent do you see self-awareness as being important for success in your company? From our standpoint at ADVISA, it’s critical in nearly all situations. Consider the following…

1. Self-awareness is the first step to growing. Without self-awareness, an employee is unaware of areas for improvement.

2. Through self-awareness, one also knows one’s strengths and unique talents, and therefore is better positioned to leverage those and maximize their contributions to the company.

3. Lack of self-awareness leads to conflict. Have you ever worked with someone who significantly lacked self-awareness? What was that experience like? How often did disagreement or ineffective communication occur because the individual just didn’t see themselves realistically, even when others tried to inform them?

If you’re still not convinced, check out this article on the Importance of Self-Awareness. But if you’re in agreement that self-awareness is quite important, let’s look at how this comes into play in hiring. When it comes to candidates screening, how can you assess a candidate’s self-awareness?

1. Get initial insight through a valid, reliable personality assessment like Predictive Index®. Predictive Index (PI®) has many applications during the hiring process, from defining the needs of the position, to marketing the opening, to helping you identify the candidates best-suited for your job. But beyond all that, it’s valuable for examining self-awareness as well. The rich, but straight-forward data you see from the 5-10 minute survey completed by the candidate tells you the workplace motivations and drives of a candidate, and likely behaviors.

2. Ask probing questions. Forget about “What’s your biggest challenge?” Try something like these:

How have you evolved as a professional over your career? What prompted the changes? What helped support the change (e.g., classes, books, mentor)?
How are you a different leader now compared to when you were in your first leadership position?
What distinguishes you as a manager/executive/sales professional/engineer/ administrator compared to your peers?
Are there any aspects of you as a professional that you’re working on developing? How are you pursuing development? Why did you identify this as being important?

3. Listen for consistency. Once you have the “peak under the hood” that PI gives you, you can anticipate areas where there are predictable behaviors that one might need to manage. See if the candidate’s responses to the probing questions above align with risks you can see in their profile and answers to other questions in the interview. This is where you can see self-awareness or possible lack of it.

4. Listen for the “so what?” After the candidate has offered self-reflection, probe for what this really means. How do they leverage an identified strength? What is their attitude about an identified development area? What are actions and results from development work they’ve done?

5. Listen for vagueness, defensiveness, judgment, dismissiveness or lack of consistency. Any of these kinds of responses point to lack of self-awareness, maturity, humility or commitment to change. If you hear these, take a harder look at whether this person will be able to fit with your company and deliver what you need.

6. Check responses out with references. If you’re fortunate enough to be able to connect with references, take an area of strength or development that that candidate mentioned and see whether the reference can confirm this.

Curious for more information? Contact me if you’d like to see a sample scenario applying the process described above. We’d also be happy to help you with any aspect of your applicant screening process through our RPO (Recruitment Process Outsourcing) service or our consulting services focused on strategic hiring.

EEOC credit check rulings bring search strategy back to basics.

Posted on December 31, 2010 by Dana Harrison

Credit checking has been around for quite awhile as an element of applicant screening, but the EEOC is taking a harder look at what was at one time considered a standard part of best hiring practices. This article by John Zappe offers a great snapshot of the issues and solid guidance on what should be considered when weighing the possibility of using this as a part of the hiring process.

What is most striking to me is that once again, this issue goes back to the basics of strategic hiring. It points to how critical it is to 1) define the demands of the position thoroughly and accurately and 2) design a hiring process that effectively assesses how candidates fit (or don’t) against the demands. It’s not necessary to start with a blank piece of paper to design a hiring process from scratch for every position – a company should have a standard process with opportunities to customize as necessary based on the positions. For example: the use of pre-employment assessments may be standard part of the process, but what is being targeted with those varies based on the position.

If you’d like someone to take a fresh look at your hiring process with an eye on strategic hiring, contact me. We’d be happy to help you get your 2011 off to a great start with even strong hiring processes in place.

Before you hire a recruiter, consider RPO

Posted on December 31, 2010 by Dana Harrison

I imagine that you’re already familiar with the process of working with a recruiter, a.k.a. headhunter. The company makes a call to the recruiter, provides some initial information about what they need, and moves on to other business. The recruiter returns with individuals deemed to be great fits for the position and is paid a percentage of the new hire’s salary. From the company’s perspective, it’s highly efficient. They didn’t have to deal with posting an ad, researching or contacting passive candidates, reviewing resumes, conducting numerous screens, etc. Especially in this economic climate when companies are starting to hire, but existing staffing is extremely tight, in house HR and hiring managers simply don’t have the time required to do all of this work. So a recruiter is the answer. Or is it?

Before you call a recruiter for your next search, I encourage you to consider an alternative: a strong RPO (Recruitment Process Outsourcing) service. And if you need a place to start, contact me – we have a great RPO service at ADVISA. RPO can manage your entire search process (ads, applicant screening, pre-employment assessment, candidate correspondence, etc.) at a fraction of the cost of traditional retained search recruiters. RPO providers are generally paid an hourly rate and are committed to best hiring practices.

If you need some hiring savvy and assistance with administering a good search, RPO may be a great fit for you. Now, if the position is highly specialized and you have to find “the needle in the haystack,” an RPO that has robust passive candidate searching or a traditional recruiter may be merited. However, in many situations, a standard RPO can provide the hiring support that is needed. Our RPO service has helped clients in 2010 fill positions ranging from sales reps to marketing directors to president. How can we help you in 2011?

A case for candor about money in your job postings

Posted on December 15, 2010 by Dana Harrison

This month while I’ve been working with several clients on strategies for employee recruiting and attracting the right candidates, the question of whether or not to include in a job posting the compensation structure or range keeps coming up. This is certainly a hot topic and one that elicits strong opinions as to what falls within best hiring practices. From my seat, however, I am a strong advocate for being candid in the job postings about the pay range.

Admittedly, there is distinct taboo in our culture for talking about money. It’s not considered socially acceptable to talk about our compensation over dinner with friends. Nor is it generally considered acceptable to talk about our compensation with our colleagues. Regardless of our perspectives on these taboos, the fact is that it is these attitudes that make us gasp at the idea of blatantly saying in a job posting, “Here’s what we’ll pay for this position.” What if the former employee sees that figure and it’s vastly different than what they earned? What will others in the company say if they know this information? Does this information help your competitor? Eek! Too many companies hear these questions and quickly mandate that postings not include wage information. I think this is an over simplified reaction and one that harms the company in the long run. Here are five reasons distinct advantages to posting the range:

Save time – The company doesn’t need to waste time with candidates who aren’t a good fit. The salary information is the best bottom-line self-selection mechanism for potential candidates. Let candidates weed themselves out if the pay just won’t work for them.
Save time (part 2) - The compensation is the clearest indicator of the level of the position. Again, let self-selection take place and let many over and under-qualified candidates pass by.
Transparency – Withholding any compensation information for late in the candidate screening process conveys to candidates a feeling that the company is playing games. This can deter candidates and/or make your new hire get started with a less-than-positive feeling about the company.
Avoid mishires – Withholding the information also may result in someone taking the position because they’ve gotten so far into the process even though the writing is on the wall that it won’t work for them financially. The outcome? Say hello to early turnover!
Appeal to cautious applicants – The cautious applicant (who may be the perfect person for your accounting, QA, purchasing, etc. position) may skip your posting and focus on those where there’s less risk in applying because the dollar figure is out on the table. You need these candidates.

Repeatedly, one of the reasons I’ve heard that a company won’t post the compensation range is because they’re not comfortable with it. Sometimes they’re unsure how competitive they are in the market. A simple salary survey (we can help with that!) will provide that information. Other times they know that they aren’t competitive and they’re nervous about turning off candidates. But I have to ask, is a strong candidate going to be more disenchanted seeing the low pay in the posting or when several steps into the screening process? If your business model depends on highly competitively priced product/services and as part of that you have low wages, I encourage you to own that, make your case as a strong employer in other ways, and embrace the advantages listed above that will come when you are candid about pay.

There is both an art and a science to recruiting employees - at ADVISA, we enjoy looking at all angles and helping our clients be savvy about their efforts. I’d love to hear your thoughts on this subject and welcome the opportunity to help advance your hiring. Let’s talk!

Losing sleep

Posted on December 4, 2010 by Dana Harrison

When I first discovered Predictive Index® (PI®), I quickly thought about how much energy I’d spent doing candidate assessment when I was making a hire and how much I could have uncovered using PI. All that time trying to dig into who a candidate really was.

Would she really be detail-focused? Would she make a mistake paying the bills and just shrug her shoulders? Would her socialness fade after the interview? Could I feel confident that she could help clients feel welcome in our office?

I’d lie awake thinking about behavioral interviewing techniques, trying to find the perfect questions to ask. There was no room for error. I couldn’t make a bad hire. There was too much at stake. And I certainly didn’t have time to redo searches.

I remember sitting with our CEO, Bob Wilson, over lunch in 2008 where I learned about PI. I just about fell out of my seat when I realized that all of the questions above could’ve been answered using PI. Hindsight is indeed 20/20!

What’s your business’ biggest challenge in the next 10 years?

Posted on November 8, 2010 by Dana Harrison

If you answered this question with ”OUR PEOPLE!”, you’re not alone.

In a recent poll by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM), “Obtaining human capital and optimizing human capital investments,” was the top need identified by respondents. A whopping 47% named this as their biggest challenge with the 2nd highest answer (financial capital) earning only 29% of the votes.

When asked how to retain and reward the best people as well as attract people to the organization, respondents offered the following top five tactics:

Providing flexibility to balance life/work;
Creating an organizational culture where trust, open communications and fairness are emphasized and demonstrated by leaders;
Having jobs designed to provide employees with meaningful work that has a clear purpose in meeting organizational objectives;
Demonstrating a committment to employee development;
Offering a higher total rewards package.

I couldn’t be more proud that ADVISA is already at work addressing this challenge and helping companies employ the kinds of tactics listed. From our strategic planning service, to our 360 assessment, to our insight into how to motivate employees, we’re helping clients in Indiana, Michigan, Ohio and beyond maximize business results and surpass their competition.

If you agree that your biggest challenges include getting the best people on board and then getting the most out of them, contact us. We’d be happy to explore how we can help.

Blog Contributors

TELL YOUR PI^® STORY