Explaining Low Scores
A valuable tool to help candidates understand their scores
We are constantly looking and listening for new and better ways to serve our customers. Recently, the good folks at Hibernia National Bank presented us with a problem. Their HR people, especially recruiters, were frequently asked by executives to explain why a candidate who interviews well and had great credentials scored low or poorly on one or more scores. This was especially worrisome if the overall recommendation was still favorable.
While Chally Account Managers were helpful, it did sometimes cause a complication and a time delay for the Hibernia executive to contact the recruiter who, in turn, contacted Chally to schedule a conference call with the executive to resolve the concerns.
To solve this challenge, we created a new support tool for Hibernia that could eventually benefit most of our clients. It will provide an "expanded" explanation of those scales used for each position. This new offering will include:
- A description of each of the skill/competence scales
- Typical behaviors of those candidates who get high scores, as well as typical behaviors of low scorers
- Two to three paragraphs describing the on-the-job impact of weakness in that skill and the potential for change, and
- Perhaps most importantly, possible positive reasons why a good candidate might naturally score low or even why a low score may be appropriate in a specific situation
Here is an example of the scale, "Ability to Direct and Control Others":
| ABILITY TO DIRECT AND CONTROL OTHERS |
| Has good delegation skills that take into consideration the skill level and professional maturity of subordinates; sets up a system or environment to ensure that delegated tasks are effectively completed; comfortable directing through multiple levels or a complex infrastructure |
HIGHS
|
LOWS
|
- Delegates with full and complete information, including timeline and results expectations
- Implements a system or process for tracking results when delegating through multiple levels
- Will evaluate and build a book on key subordinate strengths and weaknesses, and makes assignments accordingly
|
- Tends to assume assignments will be completed correctly and in a timely manner without follow-up
- Assumes that subordinates can do well what they do well, leading to frustration when results do not meet expectations
- Too dependent upon a walk-around management style to effectively delegate and manage results within a multi-level organization
|
| People who are otherwise effective, but show a low score in this area, need to recognize that there are two different kinds of directing and controlling (Corporate and Small Business Unit). At the corporate level, the function of directing and controlling is essentially selecting the right individuals for specific tasks or responsibilities, and letting those individuals operate independently under their own recognizance as long as they are producing results. If they are not producing the results, replace them. This is not a hands-on coaching, development, or supervisory role, but an executive management kind of function. It is more in line with classic delegation skills where the individual assigns responsibility for an outcome and has check points built into the process to verify the expected progress and refine any differences in the expected outcome with the direct report.
Interestingly, there is a very definite skill for Ability to Direct and Control Others in the small business, entrepreneurial or profit center role. Individuals who direct and control others in this environment function very much in a supervisory capacity. In general, the more an individual is effective and enjoys being a supervisor, the less this person will enjoy and be effective at the executive management level of Directing and Controlling Others. Likewise, individuals who are very good at the executive management level identifying, selecting the right individuals, stepping out of their way, and then replacing them if they don't do well will likewise have a problem in the more entrepreneurial, smaller hands-on supervisory role.
|
| Lower scores may indicate: |
- A need and desire to personally help people learn, to develop and coach people, and to provide individual attention.
- A preference for a more hands-on than system-driven control and monitoring process.
- A discomfort with delegating responsibility because of the belief that no one else can do the job as effectively and efficiently.
- A lack of willingness to continually evaluate key reports on critical skills.
|
Because Hibernia was both an HR Assistant and "Unlimited Usage Service Fee" customer, we were able to develop a method for them to have instant access to this information on their HR Assistant Website. Now, their recruiters can provide more in-depth explanations for the questions a hiring executive may have.
Was this solution successful? You bet! We immediately got e-mails like the following:
"Thanks so much... I love the new features ... with getting the analysis on specific job descriptions... a real useful tool!!" - H. M., Hibernia National Bank
"You are wonderful! Thanks. I just LOVE Chally!" - J. F., Hibernia National Bank
Call or email your Chally Account Manager for more information if you'd like us to develop this service for you.
|
