It is very important to remain realistic and being ready also for compromises. Of course, there are issues where compromising would endanger the success of the project. And we have to identify these competences we will at no price make compromise, those where we can step back (how much that we don’t bring the project under the question), and those where it would be nice to have but we could live without and the project is still doable.
Do we have right fish on the hook?
Imagine: you are selecting a key person, probably a CRO. You have seen some candidates and probably one of them has something valuable, some characteristics that make him/her relevant. At least, you think so or you have such a feeling as you have such impression, you “have heard positive things about the person”, he/she has the birthday on the same day as you, he/she has good business acumen and you like his/her presentation. Such quick, baseless conclusions are very dangerous for unskilled selector.
The halo effect is one of the most common mistakes done by managers when selecting a new employee. It is actually an overall impression based on certain characteristic which impacts also general picture of a person. Very good example of the halo effect is our overall impression of celebrities. Since we perceive them as attractive, successful and often likeable, we also tend to see them as intelligent and kind. Another example are politicians who are presenting themselves as warm and friendly while saying little of any substance. People tend to believe this and are after some speeches they are convinced that their policies are good because the person appears good.
Classic mistakes while hooking CRO
Other classical mistakes in the interview process are related to:
- the order of presentence (the first and the last candidate leave the strongest impression, those in between are mostly “grey”),
- usage of yes/no questions
- logical mistake when the selector doesn’t distinguish among two competencies
- central tendency – tendency to give candidates a middle rating rather than using “excellent” or “not adequate” what would clearly indicate that the candidate strongly demonstrated the competency of did not demonstrate it at all
- contrast effect – rating one candidate against another instead of against the competency.
How to avoid this and some other most common interview mistakes?
Be prepared by knowing who you are talking to, what you are talking about, who you are looking for and what you/the company expect from the candidate on this position.
Allow enough time – as always, time pressure is killing the process. Therefore prepare the scenario of an interview, watch the time and be the boss of the show.
Ask qualificative questions, starting with What (… was the situation when you took over the last position, … was the first thing you did when you entered the company, … was the hardest decision in your career), How (…did you achieve this, ...did you coordinate the team, … did you solve the conflict between sales and finance…), How much/how many (… )
Challenge the candidate by elements of behavioral interview. This is a type of interview where questions are focused and request examples of handling a specific situations, starting with Give an example (…of an occasion when you foreseen the result, … of a goal you reached/didn’t meet and how did you handle it), Describe (…a stressful situation and how did you handle it), Tell me (…about how you worked effectively under such pressure, … have you ever made a mistake). Avoid hypothetical questions (How would you react in the case if…) as you will get a hypothetical answer. Ask about experience.
Request exact answers and insist until you get those, do not get satisfied with long answer which doesn’t answer your question. Keep returning to it.
Listen – be active, make notes, encourage the candidate to speak and do not comment (…Oh, that was not wise… How could you allow something like this… You should have reacted immediately…) It is not so important what the candidate says but the context, what he/she says “between lines”. For example, to the question: What was the reason that you left the company X after only a few months? can be given an answer: Personal reasons. Halo? Would somebody change the job for “non-personal reasons” and not explain this? Or answer: New challenges. This answer has to be explained in details. What are “new challenges”, why “old challenges” were not relevant any more… Such answers open lots of issues, lights alarms and call for more detailed explanations to get larger picture on person’s priorities, goals and focus.
Observe – usually the gestures tell more than words. Learn about body language, pay attention to candidates uncomforting signs (sweating, unrest, nervousness…) . However, don’t get obsessed by gestures and make too quick conclusions.
Make notes and evaluate the competencies by marks from 1 to 5. After interviews, prepare a matrix where you compare candidates by summarizing the marks of each competency.
Ask candidates for one of key positions in the company to prepare a written document (with limited data and within relatively short time frame) on maximum two pages about his/her vision of the position, priorities, challenges, budget, time…, think of relevant subject to check the ability to verbalize the thoughts, to present them, to improvise and to handle the pressure.
Each interview has to be thorough, slightly stressful and surely not just a pleasant talk. It should be as a massage, where after the therapy, thus the client and the therapist are at least a little sweaty.
To conclude, let me give you a final tip: invite candidate to ask YOU some questions. Candidates' questions tell even more than his/her answers to your questions.
Amrop Adria, Director
Human Capital Advisory
Ni komentarjev :
Objavite komentar