There’s no doubt recruitment is getting harder these days.
In addition to traditional recruitment methods, such as SEEK, recruitment agencies and internal networks, you need to be on top of newer technologies, and increasing social media options.
It all adds up to a higher mountain of applications and additional process work.
Yes, there are many tools on the market (e.g. Successfactors, Taleo, JobVite, Hiring Thing, Talent Propeller), and many others, that help you manage the sheer load of applications. They sort through skills, experience and qualifications through automated CV screening, track applicant progress, and provide a short list of ‘ideal’ candidates to interview. It all sounds great. Yet, whilst they save you time and the need for additional manual resources, the problem with depending soley on these systems is that you can still hire the wrong person, costing you even more than the system itself!
So how can this be?
The key word here is ‘person’. Many companies hire the right set of skills, qualifications and experience, yet down the track realise that the person is not working out. Sound familiar?
Candidates these days are more sophisticated than ever with self marketing and professionally developed CV’s. A plethora of on-line job seeking courses and coaching is giving candidates the knowledge and edge to perform well in an interview – but does that mean they will actually perform well in your role & company long term?
Without looking deeper into the person that they really are, you are taking a gamble on face value. Similarly, judging poor interview performance as meaning they will perform poorly in the role long term, is irresponsible to the recruitment process.
Candidates may tick all the right ‘skills and experience’ boxes, yet studies prove that over 47% of employment engagements don’t work out. Not because of poor job skills, knowledge or experience, rather because of unrealised expectations of the desired behaviours and temperament needed in the employee.
The fact is that whilst many hiring managers know precisely the skills, experience and education they are looking for in a candidate, they are simply not skilled or trained adequately in identifying or knowing the right combination of critical, key behaviours and temperament required for optimum, long term results.
Many managers make a ‘wish list’ of behaviours, values and temperaments they want candidates to have, and don’t realise that what they are asking for are diametrically opposed behaviours. Often I will review job ads posted on SEEK that ‘require’ the candidate to have a long list of behavioural traits that is like asking for a ‘pushmi-pullmi’ from Doctor Doolittle to show up. It is a fictitious animal that just doesn’t exist. The polished interviewee who does manage to convince the hiring manager that they have all of these behaviours is then hired, but then slammed 6 months later for not being the ‘ two-headed, side show’ that the hiring manager had actually wanted in the first place. Go figure. The employee is then blamed for not being able to (insert what ever unrealistic expectation you have placed on them here). The finger is pointed at the employee as the problem, and not at the hiring process.
There are many studies that prove that employers hire for skills & experience, but fire for incompatible behaviours.
It all adds up to a CRUCIAL ‘missing-link’ in your recruitment strategy that costs tens of thousands in the future.
It is not enough to rely on automatic candidate tracking or assessing systems to spit out the ‘ideal’ candidate as many lack the function to job match based on the right combination of behaviour and temperament. Which is a big reason employment engagements don’t work out.
So what are the right combinations of behaviours and temperament? and how should you avoid creating a ‘wish list’ of diametrically opposing behaviours?