Selecting Employees is Like Trading Horses.

Posted by Ricki Sharpe on September 1, 2006  
Filed Under Selection

Selecting employees is like trading horses. If you’ve never been fooled, you’ve only done it once. This quote comes from a client CEO who knows the value of putting the right person in the right job at the right time, but who also displays the scars of getting it wrong. In spite of claims to the contrary, there is no foolproof way to select employees. There is no silver bullet, magical test, interview technique, background check, or experience requirement to insure that every pick will be a winner. There is only a choice of scientific methods and procedures designed to reduce the risk of a bad hire.

Research psychologists know that psychological assessment is one of the most effective methods available to aid selection. However, even psychologists sometimes get it wrong and their tests are by no means foolproof. Clients sometimes ask why a particular test does not seem to gel with interview impressions or with what is generally known about a candidate. The assumption made is that something is wrong with the test.

One possible explanation is that the test is not measuring what an interview or a reference check is measuring. In a recent survey of 273 US companies by Right Management Consultancy Inc., more than four out of 10 companies cited inadequate definition of behaviours critical to successful performance as the number one mistake businesses make in hiring and promoting employees.

Another possible explanation for the discrepancy is that the candidate is being very open and honest and has unwittingly conveyed a negative impression. Most modern personality surveys have, or should have, high face validity, i.e., when a candidate reads a question, he/she will generally know what is being measured. There should be no trick questions or hidden meanings. Therefore, when a personality survey places a candidate in the Avoid or just OK category and this is inconsistent with other evidence, the candidate could be telling you something about himself or herself, and that something is worth exploring.

The opposite side of this coin occurs when the candidate conveys a very positive picture. Research now suggests that making a fake good assumption about this outcome could be wrong. Such a response pattern may be indicative of: (1) having a positive general perspective on life; (2) lacking self-insight or being unaware of limitations; (3) trying too hard to present well on the personality questionnaire; or (4) being defensive. Some people who respond in this manner may have a tendency to be bluffers; they may create an initial impression that is more favourable than their subsequent job performance. Others with this type of favourable response pattern may simply have a genuinely positive perspective regarding themselves, other people, and life in general.

Yet another reason why candidates’ results may appear at odds with external impressions is that he/she may have achieved success in other roles without the traits generally measured by personality surveys. He/she may have achieved that success through motivation, intelligence, experience, helpful benefactors etc.

Whatever the reason for the apparent discrepancy, it is worth exploring further in an interview. Indeed, this is the best way to use personality surveys, as interview aids, not as pass or fail devices. They will occasionally throw up false positives and true negatives. It is always uncomfortable having information that is at odds with test results. However, no test can give a 100% guarantee. Remember, if you screen out a ‘good’ candidate, you will never know about it, but if you screen in a ‘poor’ candidate, you most certainly will know about it.

Resist the temptation to hire someone just because you need to fill the job. You are likely to pay for a hiring mistake in both money and time. Focus on how well the candidate fits the demands of the job, not how much you like the candidate’s personality, or how much you have in common with the candidate.

The selection process is an aid to the well-reasoned judgement of a hiring manager, not a replacement for this judgement. In the end, every hiring decision is a judgement call. Use the tools provided in this process to inform your decision, not make it for you.


Print This Post Print This Post

Similar Posts

Comments

Leave a Reply