The Right People on the Bus…

According to a report on the CBS news website in the US, EmmaLee Bauer, a sales coordinator at a Sheraton hotel in Iowa, wasn’t what you might call a highly motivated individual. Bauer seemed to have a lot of free time on her hands, so to look busy she began recording her working day in a journal. Her ‘work’ included typing observations such as: “This typing thing seems to be doing the trick. It just looks like I am hard at work on something very important”, as well as other gems, like “I am only here for the money and, lately, for the printer access. I haven’t really accomplished anything in a long while . . . and I am still getting paid more than I ever have at a job before, with less to do than I have ever had before. It’s actually quite nice when I think of it that way. I can shop online, play games and read message boards and still get paid for it.” [1]

Unfortunately for Bauer, committing such thoughts to paper (or more accurately her work computer), is always a risky venture and so it proved as her boss soon discovered the journal and promptly fi red her. She was later denied unemployment benefits by a judge who said her journal showed a refusal to work and “amusement at getting away with it”. You have to admire her audacity though for taking the case in the first place.

Thankfully, the majority of employees are honest, hard-working individuals. Everyone has off-days, but the bulk of people I encounter actually like their job and want to do it to the best of their ability. That said, some people either don’t fit in, or fail to rise to expectations for various reasons and then there are those, albeit a very tiny minority, who consistently fall well below expectations. From experience you will already be well aware of this fact and the question, and focus here, is how do these various under-performers, from the mild to the severe, sneak under the recruitment radar with such apparent ease and frequency?

It is partially explained by the fact that there are individuals out there who thrive in an interview setting to the extent that they can pull the wool over our eyes. However, from what I have seen, the main reason why managers are so frequently caught out in terms of hiring people who later disappoint has more to do with the fact that the recruitment process itself is frequently mismanaged. This may sound harsh, but it is a reality, and particularly so where small or medium enterprises are concerned. Although there has been a vast improvement in the quality of recruitment practice and methods over recent decades or more, it’s still far from a perfect process in many organisations. Given the risks and costs associated with poor recruitment, this is not something that can be ignored any longer.

In his book, Good to Great, Jim Collins highlighted the importance of having the best people as a driver of success and he explained that those who build great organizations make sure they have ‘the right people on the bus’ and the right people in the key seats, before they figure out where to drive the bus. [1] I like that analogy and as you read ahead think about how good you currently are at ensuring that your bus is brimming full of the right people.

1. Failures of Recruitment

Effective recruitment involves a comprehensive process, as shown below, with many interlinked steps. Of course, the primary goal of the process should be to attract a pool of suitable candidates for any given post and then to ensure that you get the best of what’s available. And that’s how you should approach recruitment: positively, as a quest to find people who best fi t with your organisation and the role to be filled. However, you also have to remember that it’s a process intended to keep undesirable employees out too. You need to do everything in your power to minimise the potential for ‘bad apples’ to slip through the net.

Even if all these steps are managed to perfection, you will still get caught out occasionally – it is a human activity after all – but just less often. The intention here is not to focus on all elements of this process, but rather to concentrate on the aspect of it that is likely to be of most relevance to managers, namely the interview phase. You will no doubt be frequently involved in interviewing for new hires, at various levels, and even if you are very experienced in this area there is always room for improvement. In fact, studies have shown that, while veteran interviewers tend to believe they are good at selecting the right candidate, that level of confidence is often unfounded; experience is, after all, only of value if you have been doing the right things.

An important reason why some managers make poor selection decisions following interviews is that their focus is still too much on what someone can do – their skills and competences, as opposed to who they are – their personal qualities. Of course, a balance between both facets is evidently needed, but sometimes there is too much emphasis placed during the interview on exploring the doing bit at the expense of delving into the candidate’s personality. However, when you think about it, you can quite easily determine what skills someone has from their CV, so the focus in terms of recruitment, and especially during the interview phase, should be to figure out whether a candidate is the right fit for your organisation. Ultimately skills can be learned, but it is far harder, I find, to change someone’s personality, so you should use the interview to understand, as best you can, what type of person you are really dealing with.

In seeking to recruit any new employee, you therefore need to consider both what they can do and who they are. In relation to the latter, it is only through having a clear picture in your mind of the type of person you are looking for that you can ever hope to have any chance of finding the most suitable individual from the pool available. Many businesses today have developed employee profiles that help to pinpoint a range of traits and characteristics associated with key positions in the organisation, and if you don’t currently have such tools, then ask yourself: on what basis are people being hired for various posts in your company at present?

Armed with a clear image of the ideal candidate, you can then more usefully prepare for interviews by devising a set of questions (and exercises if appropriate) based on that profile, which will help you to better know the person sitting in front of you. What’s more, by using a simple weighted evaluation form – also based on the profile – each candidate can then be benchmarked against the ideal characteristics required.

2. Pitfalls Associated with Interviews

Dr Allen Huffcutt of Bradley University has identified seven principles [2] for getting the most out of recruitment interviews:

Principle 1: Acknowledge the Inherent Difficulty of Making Judgments from an Interview

It is easy to forget that an interview is at best a flawed mechanism for selecting individuals for employment. There are so many variables that even small imperfections in the process can lead to poor selection. In recognising those limitations you should therefore pay close attention to how you prepare for, and manage, interviews in order to ensure that you at least maximise their potential for success.

Principle 2: Know as Little About the Candidate as Possible

This is interesting, as it goes completely against the commonly held wisdom that you should know as much about a candidate before the interview. The reason Huffcutt promotes this view is that when an interviewer reviews candidate information beforehand, this can result in a three-step process coming into play:

1. First, when the interviewer reviews information in advance he or she forms a general impression of a candidate (and given that we are all human, we can be swayed by factors such as one candidate going to a particular school or university).

2. During the interview, when the interviewer has already formed a favourable impression of a particular candidate in advance, they can subconsciously shift from objectively probing and testing their suitability into an ‘impression

confirming mode’, whereby they assess the answers of favoured candidates less harshly than others. This is known as the ‘Halo Effect’.

3. Finally, the combination of the initial favourable impression and the selective testing of suitability during the interview can then carry through to the evaluation stage, whereby the applicant is given a higher rating than is perhaps justified. Think of it this way: if you have (subconsciously) made up your mind from the outset that this candidate outshines others, even when they don’t, you will likely give them a higher score at the end in order to position them above the next best applicant.

Dr Huffcutt made the very valid point that “it is important to note that the above process works in the negative direction as well. If an interviewer forms a negative impression of a candidate beforehand (e.g. the candidate went to a ‘lesser’ school), the interviewer can shift into an impression confirming mode and looks for things that confirm their negative impression. That of course can easily lead to asking more difficult questions, being more picky and ignoring or minimizing positive information.” This is a principle well worth reflecting upon and although you might still review candidate information in advance, you should try to avoid forming too favourable or unfavourable an impression beforehand.

Principle 3: Avoid Poor Questions

Ensure that your questions are planned in advance and based upon the job requirements and personal characteristics you are looking for. Huffcutt suggests that “every question should relate directly to the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other characteristics (‘KSAOs’) associated with a given position”. This is common sense perhaps, but when you watch unprepared interviewers in action, you quite often hear them asking questions that add little or no value to the decision-making process in terms of identifying candidate suitability. An example of this may well be where an interviewer, who perhaps hasn’t had the time, or made the effort, to review the CV in advance, devotes an inordinate proportion of the interview asking the candidate to recount his or her past work experience, without really probing the value or learning from those positions or roles. Questions which allow the candidate to simply list off what they did previously in response are of little help in determining suitability.

Huffcutt also promotes the use of behavioural (“Tell me how you managed your team during an important project...”) and situational (“What would you do if. . .”) type questions to better understand candidates. It is also important, he emphasises, to avoid using the same-old formulaic questions for which candidates can offer pre-prepared answers, e.g. where do you want to be in five years? By the way, if you do ask that last question, the candidate will usually have some rehearsed answer like ‘in your position’ etc. A good interviewer will then follow up with a question like ‘What’s your plan to achieve that goal?’ and usually the candidate won’t have thought through an answer for that follow-up question. This idea of gentle probing the first answer to get behind the standard or rehearsed answer is what helps you to better get to know the person sitting opposite you.

Principle 4: Utilise Interview Structure

According to Huffcutt: “Of all the findings in the interview research literature, perhaps the most consistent and practically meaningful is the effect of structure.” [3] In short, based on his analysis of a variety of research, the more structured the interview process, the more valid it becomes in terms of objectively assessing candidate suitability. Unfortunately, many managers still run poorly structured interviews that differ wildly between candidates in terms of length of time taken, the questions asked, and the degree of probing, thus making like-for-like comparisons between all candidates virtually impossible afterwards.

Principle 5: Avoid Making Judgements Early in the Interview

As inferred earlier, this is a well-known drawback with interviewing and there is no easy answer to overcoming our propensity to form early first impressions. However, as Huffcutt explains it is important to acknowledge that this is a pitfall, and then to work hard to delay one’s decisions, which is a skill that can be developed over time. He concludes: “Like most skills, learning to delay judgements takes time and practice. It might be useful for interviewers to think of themselves as ‘investigative agents’, ones who do not arrive at a conclusion and take action until every nook and cranny has been explored.”

Principle 6: Watch for Applicant Performance Effects

It is also well-known that some candidates can use various tactics during the interview that are designed to increase their standing, such as praising you personally, or the company, overstating their achievements and even downright fabrication. One would imagine that interviewers would see right through this type of thing, but Huffcutt’s analysis of research on this particular area showed that “the use of these tactics by applicants can have a significant influence on the outcome of the interview”.

Principle 7: Look for Multiple Sources of Evidence

The essential point here is not to over-rely on one interview, or single interviewers, as the primary selection method and even within interviews answers should be probed and tested rather than taken at face value. In addition, many companies use multiple interviews to better understand the individual. Beyond interviewing, the use of psychometric testing, assessment centres, presentations, referencechecking, etc. provide additional data to support decision-making.

While these principles are not necessarily new, given the extensive analysis of available research on interviewing undertaken by Allen Huffcutt, his views are certainly worth considering.

3. Making the Most of Interviews

Having identified some common pitfalls with interviews, the intention is not to go step-by-step through the interview process, as you will likely have had some form of training on this area. If you haven’t, then you should definitely consider getting some because every new person you bring into your team has the potential to make it better, or a lot worse – the consequences of poor interviewing skills can be long-lasting. Rather, this section explores some points relating to the structure of the interview and the technique you use.

Before getting to those specific aspects of interviews, consider the following general tips on preparation, which may seem simple, but it’s amazing how often they are still overlooked:

• Always prepare fully for interviews in advance As touched on earlier, you will often see an unprepared interviewer reading through a CV for the first time during the interview. Th is is particularly bad practice, so don’t do it. Review the CV or application before the interview, but (as discussed above) be aware of any issues or factors that might sway you.

• Prepare the interview area Choose a private setting, not too formal, where you and the candidate can both concentrate. Holding an interview in your office is not ideal for many reasons, including that it’s your ‘turf ’, which means that you are going to be more relaxed in that environment and the candidate is likely to feel under greater pressure. It is also the place where you will potentially face most distractions that can disrupt the interaction. Don’t underestimate the importance of the location you choose in terms of providing the right environment to bring the best out of the candidate and afford you the greatest opportunity to concentrate.

• Prepare an interview plan Incorporate into your plan the structured questions you develop based on the profile of the ideal candidate, and on the requirements of the job.

• Limit the number of candidates Try to limit the number you see in any one day so that you stay fresh and alert for all candidates.

With these preparation tips in mind, when holding the interview, there are many different interview structures that can be followed but as we have done for all communication scenarios in this book, let’s keep things relatively straightforward and examine the interview in terms of three phases: beginning, middle and end.

The Beginning

Clearly, at the beginning of the interview, there are certain things you need to do. To start with, it is good practice to meet the candidate at reception personally and escort them to the interview room, as you can learn a lot about someone in those few minutes – their level of confidence, how at ease they are with small talk, and so on. Sometimes, as soon as a candidate enters the interview room, they can slip into ‘interview mode’ so on the walk up you can often get glimpses of the candidate’s true self.

To kick off an interview you will of course want to put the applicant at ease, and to let them know how the interview will be structured, whether it’s part of a wider process and so on. A relaxed candidate will perform better.

The Middle

The bulk of the interview should obviously be devoted to finding out about the candidate. Th at sounds obvious, but the reality in many interviews is that the interviewer does too much talking; work through your questions and let the candidate speak. Apply the 80/20 rule: the candidate should talk for 80% of the time. That obviously does not mean you let them ramble on incessantly, you should probe and test (but not interrogate) their responses to get behind what are often rehearsed answers of one kind or another. As a rule you should:

• Begin with general questions moving to the more specific.

• Use your question technique to explore background, attitudes, suitability, etc. relevant to the job description and, more importantly, to the employee profile you are seeking.

• Use a variety of behavioural and situational questions relevant to the role.

• Follow your interview plan, and do so as closely as possible for all candidates asking them the same or similar questions. It is only through this approach that you can actually evaluate suitability against a common standard.

In terms of timing, this exploration phase of the interview should clearly form the main component. The general question also arises as to how long an interview should be and it’s very difficult to suggest a set time but, in reality, for any position, interviewing for less than 30 minutes is not advised – and if you find you have candidates who are ruled out very early in the interview, then you might need to look more closely at the effectiveness of your screening process. As a rule, interview fewer candidates, for longer. For any management position, you should be looking at a first interview lasting up to one hour, and having a couple of interviews as part of the process. Also keep in mind that as you assess the candidate they are also making judgments about you and the organisation, so you need to come across as professional – after all, you want the person you do select in the end to have a positive view of you when they turn up on day one.

The End

Once you have obtained all the relevant information you need, you should then allow the candidate to ask you questions about the position, ensuring that you:

• Outline the job description in greater detail, giving an overview of their potential role in the company.

• Discuss salary if not mentioned already; provide them with details on your Employee Value Proposition.

• Answer any remaining questions.

• Ask to check references and give a timetable for the decision and how they will be notified.

• Thank them.

Once a candidate leaves, allow time before seeing the next person in order to review their performance and prepare a written evaluation and weighted rating against the defined criteria. By doing so, you will have a set of completed evaluations at the end of the day and will be better able to identify the higher-scoring candidates, rather than trying to remember who was who. Also, take a break before the next interview so that you are fresh and ready to be as attentive as possible.

Of course, the majority of points covered here about interviews are fairly straightforward, and indeed most are well known, but despite this, research and my first-hand experience shows that they are not consistently applied by many managers. Your primary goal for interviews should be to fi nd the best available candidate, so it’s important that you approach this critical management activity from that perspective. However, if you consider the damage that even one bad hire can do to your business or department and how much time, effort and money you have to expend to clean up the mess afterwards – all of which are scarce resources these days – then that should also encourage you to pay more attention to ensure that you are not misled by unsuitable candidates.

A good place to start is to ask yourself how good you are, and have been, at getting the right people on the bus.

If you found the content of this article interesting, I have expanded on the topic in my book, 'The Essential Manager'. Click on the image to the left to purchase the book on Amazon, or if you'd like a signed copy you can purchase one directly on this site via our products page.

References

[1] Collins, Jim. Good to Great. Random House Business Books, 2001.

[2] Huffcutt, “From Science to Practice: Seven Principles for Conducting Employment Interviews” (2010) 12 Applied H.R.M. Research, pp. 121–136.