Lou Adler Group - Originators of Performance-based Hiring
After tracking the 10-year performance of 100s of candidates I placed in mid-management roles from 1980 to 2000, I finally figured out how to measure Quality of Hire. It’s described in detail in Chapter 16 of Hire with Your Head (4th edition, 2021, Wiley). The other day I asked ChatGPT if the approach was still […]
I asked ChatGPT to write a story based on this postand the image below. It seems quite relevant today given that fact that most people are unhappy with their jobs. The theme: Time is your most valuable, don’t waste it. Given that. I’d rank number five as the most important. – LA, August 21, 2023. […]
I recognize this is a bit self-serving, but I asked ChatGPT if our Quality of Hire Talent Scorecard could be used to improve hiring results. I was surprised it was so insightful interpreting relationships and ideas that were never written. You’ll see what I mean below.
While it’s hard to believe that a single hiring mistake could cost a company $400 thousand, it’s not so hard to believe when looking at this table showing the incremental profit contribution of employees at these well-known companies. The idea behind this table is that it shows the full financial and business impact a person has on a company, rather than just considering the person’s compensation package.
Many years ago I worked with LinkedIn on preparing a video highlighting the importance of developing a hiring strategy based on attracting the best rather than one designed to filter out the weak. It turns out that without the right talent strategy it’s not possible to hire more leaders on a consistent basis. Chance, hope, the latest technology or job boards won’t help. While the message in the video is still true today, most people will have some Catch-22 excuse why it won’t work.
In my 45+ years as a recruiter, one of the many things I’ve learned is that strangers get a bad deal when it comes to being accurately assessed during interviews. While people who are known to the hiring manager are assessed on their past performance, strangers are judged on their motivation to get the job, a bunch of generic competencies, the depth of their technical knowledge and the quality of their presentation skills. Worse, all of these factors are viewed through a biased lens filled with misconceptions and flawed logic.
When I first became a recruiter, one big frustration was having hiring managers reject good people for bad reasons. When this happened, the hiring manager would inevitably ask, “Do you have any other candidates?” and I would have to do the search all over again. For everyone involved — the recruiter, the hiring manager, and the candidate — this is a waste of time. And when it happens too often, it means the hiring process is broken.
The reason hiring acquaintances is more predictable is that these people are hired based on their known performance doing comparable work in comparable situations. Strangers, on the other hand, don’t get this free pass. Instead, they’re first screened on their level of skills, experiences and academic background and then assessed in large measure on the quality of their presentation skills, first impression and personality.
While a professional phone screen won’t solve these problems, it will identify their root cause. That’s why every recruiter and hiring manager needs to master the phone screen before implementing any other hiring initiative.
To access this article you must be a registered user/member of this site. Click the appropriate link below to continue.
To access this article you must be a registered user/member of this site. Click the appropriate link below to continue.
To access this article you must be a registered user/member of this site. Click the appropriate link below to continue.