The Most Common Hiring Mistakes
and How to Prevent Them
 Science isn't always helpful to the typical businessman. But in the area of researching and evaluating the effectiveness of different methods of hiring employees, the researchers have a lot to offer. Their ability to track and measure the accuracy, cost effectiveness and competitive value of various techniques has produced a compelling review of the 9 most common mistakes in hiring or promoting employees.
Mistake 1: Relying on an Interview to Evaluate a Candidate
In a massive study conducted by John and Rhonda Hunter at The University of Michigan on the "Validity and Utility of Alternative Predictors of Job Performance"1, the usefulness of the interview in accurately predicting later success on the job was analyzed. The surprising finding: The typical interview increases the likelihood of choosing the best candidate by less than 2%. In other words, if you just "flipped" a coin you would be correct 50% of the time. If you added an interview you would only be right 52% of the time.
Why is the interview such a poor tool...and why is it still the most commonly used selection technique? Experts suggest three reasons.
- Most managers don't structure an interview and determine the best answers (develop a scoring weight) before the interview.
- Candidates do a lot more interviewing than most managers and are more skillful at presenting a strong appearance than the average manager is at probing past their "front."
- An interview does help evaluate "personal chemistry" and allow the manager to get a feel of how well they might get along and work together. This is an important issue even if it doesn't predict the candidate's future potential to succeed in the job.
Mistake 2: Using Successful People as a Model
It would seem like common sense to try to duplicate success. The flaw is that the reasons people succeed are not clear from just measuring the traits or characteristics of top performers. The critical information you must know is how top performers are different from poor performers.
For example, consider a major comprehensive study of top salespeople based on a sample of over 1000 sales superstars, across 70 companies. The top three characteristics these superstars had in common were 1) belief that salesmanship required good skills at answering objections, 2) the habit of being well groomed, and 3) wearing conservative clothes...especially black shoes.
However, when the worst or weakest performers at these companies were measured, the same three characteristics were found to be the most common traits of these failures. The lesson: you must "validate" the critical skills for success by comparing the differences between a large enough sample of top performers against weak performers to find the factors that consistently distinguish the winners from the "also rans". Otherwise, you may select good-sounding and energetic candidates who fail quickly but with style.
Mistake 3: Setting Too Many Criteria
The only sound method of improving the effectiveness of personnel selection is called "Validation". It is similar to the process that insurance companies use to identify what the factors that predict the likelihood of having a heart attack or any other health or accident risk.
Validation research was originally driven by the government to prove that employment selection predicted job success and wasn't discriminatory. Today it is used because it dramatically improves the chances of hiring the right people. The power of this statistical research method is that it not only identifies the critical factors that predict success in a job, but also weighs each factor to identify how important each factor is.
Two of the most important findings from this research were a surprise:
- The number one (or most critical) factor for success in any given job is often as important or more important than all the other factors put together.
- The most accurate prediction of success on the job is based on no more than 6-8 factors. Adding more job criteria actually weakens the likelihood of a good selection because "diluting" the criteria by adding extra "nice-sounding" criteria actually watered down the prediction of success and killed the accuracy of the selection process.
Conclusion: Narrow down your criteria to the top 6-8 factors that distinguish winners from failures and ignore everything else that hasn't been validated, or you will be trapped into hiring "nice guys who finish last"!
Mistake 4: Evaluating "Personality" instead of Job Skills
The trouble with common sense is that it is often based on anecdotes and circumstantial examples rather than real and objective research. Many consultants and test-sellers, for example, have offered psychological theories to support their belief that certain personality factors are critical to success in management, sales or other types of jobs.
Solid statistical research reported from many objective sources has shown that there is very little correlation between any personality factor and any specific job. Competent and reputable "personality" type test producers (like the Myers Briggs) readily admit their tools are useful for self-awareness and training but are not suited for hiring candidates. Only "skills-based tests" or job knowledge tests have consistently been proven to predict success on the job.
So while it might be nice to know that a sales candidate has self-confidence and high energy, it is far more likely that it is critical to know whether he or she can retain and penetrate existing customers or develop new ones.
Mistake 5: Using Yourself as an Example
A famous lawyer once said "The attorney who would represent himself has a fool for a client." It's equally true in hiring new employees. Some sales managers, for example, who got to be managers based on their "success" as salespeople believe that they can instinctively recognize a good candidate.
Many of the top business managers, however, have learned through tough trial and error, and are more cautious. They look for an objective and independent source to confirm or refute their gut instincts. Otherwise, they would be unconsciously just using themselves as a template. Most importantly, when you use yourself as a model your own ego has to get in the way. It does for everybody, and that "bias" can interfere with your objectivity in judging others...a fatal flaw when hiring.
Mistake 6: Not Using Statistically Validated Testing that Predicts the Actual Job Skills Most Critical to Success on the Job
There is a place for using "deductive reasoning" or "brainstorming through a committee" to identify criteria for selection. It is helpful in team building, instilling a spirit of cooperation and participation, and even in focusing the organization on the importance of hiring the right people. It is not, however, effective at identifying the critical reasons candidates fail or succeed on the job.
There are two flaws with the deductive or brainstorming approach. First, they tend to focus on theories instead of facts, e.g., what facts or data prove that a high level of "self-confidence" guarantees a better employee. Second, they focus on attitudes, experience and abilities, not on skills. Skills are the critical elements that consistently predict job success. Incentives can motivate a skilled person, but all the motivation and good intentions won't improve an unskilled candidate.
Experts suggest that we back into relying on "reasoning" or "common sense" because it is easier to determine an individual's attitude or personality than to measure their skills. Skills often can only be measured by carefully developed tests or real on-the-job trials.
Mistake 7: Not Researching the Reasons People Have Failed in a Job
Research consistently shows that people fail in a job due to factors different from the criteria used to select them. Most managers can list the two, three or four most common reasons people have failed. Surprisingly, however, this exercise is seldom part of the process used to select the criteria to select new candidates. Identifying these "failure points" and building it into the selection process can reduce hiring mistakes by as much as 25 percent.
For example, in most competitive sales situations, the average potential customer buys from a new salesperson only after six contacts. The average failed salesperson gives up after three contacts. So while some of their sales techniques may have been adequate, the tendency to give up after three rejections was never evaluated or discovered.
Mistake 8: Relying on General "Good Guy" Criteria
While everybody wants to hire "good people", merely being a good person (i.e., good presentation skills, enthusiastic, hard working, self-starting, etc.) is not a predictor of success on the job. The primary reason is that skills have become so specialized there is little advantage or application for very general skills unless we're selecting for the most administrative type of entry level jobs.
Selecting athletes can offer a clear example. At the lowest level jobs, maybe "T-ball", or little league, the selection criteria for a baseball player are very broad: dexterity, lack of fear of the ball, and a desire to play. As we move up to the high school or college level, the baseball selection criteria get more focused on the four general skills required for the game: running, hitting, throwing and fielding. All four of these general talents are found at the highest level in the best athletes. Thus, it is often true that a coach who needs to replace the pitcher must shift him to right field because he is also one of the team's best hitters.
However, at the professional level the differences in skills between a pitcher and a fielder are so great they're not interchangeable and no pro scout would rely on the four general baseball skills as selection criteria for either a pitcher or a shortstop.
Mistake 9: Not Doing A Careful Background Reference Check
For whatever reason, various recruiting and placement agencies report that there is a fairly high percentage of false information presented in resumes and job applications ... i.e., 15% to 20% of job applicants try to hide some dark chapter of their lives.2 For some positions it can be as high as one out of every three resumes.
While it takes extra effort, not doing thorough homework to verify critical information almost always results in problems later. An individual who will twist the facts to get a job will probably twist the rules on the job. Most leopards won't change their spots. It is much better to be carefully safe than carelessly sorry.
Chally's Solutions to Avoid Hiring Mistakes:
1. Evaluate a candidate only on the skills critical for success in your job:
2. Provide the best and most responsive service:
- Dedicate a selection consultant to your company
- Provide multiple options to best fit your needs
- Assist your staff as needed in the entire selection process, including interviewing and other screening steps
Footnotes
1John & Rhonda Hunter, "Validity and Utility of Alternative Predictors of Job Performance", Psychological Bulletin, July 1984, p. 90.
2Edward A. Robinson, "Beware -- Job Seekers Have No Secrets", Fortune, December 29, 1997, p. 285
|
