Why the hiring system fails
Hiring managers admit that nearly 50 percent of new hires fail to meet their professional obligations in the first 18 months of employment based on research led by Leadership IQ.
Experts estimate that this type of bad hiring decision can cost your business as much as 20 to 200% of a year’s salary depending on Human Resource Management. Besides the cost, bad hires hurt office morale, disrupt individual productivity, and are difficult to fire because they become entangled in office politics.
Why is the hiring system failing? The problem lies in the traditional selection process:
Look good on a CV
With a little embellishment, smart wording, great typeface, good spelling, and good grammar, just about anyone can look good on a resume. Job seekers who are not good at writing their own CVs can even hire a CV consultant such as Jeffrey Metzger for as low as $ 225. Metzger describes his role as follows:
“I specialize in writing high quality, attention-grabbing personal marketing materials. A resume alone can’t get you the job, but a poorly written resume can certainly eliminate you from consideration.
If you are a recent graduate, changing careers, or a seasoned professional, we have a resume solution for you. Each CV is tailor-made to reflect your goals and your personality.
You can never be sure that a CV is the work of the candidate in front of you, and if it is if it is 100% true. Ultimately, whether someone sounds good on a resume or not is not a good predictor of how well they perform at work.
There is a interesting story about sorting through a pile of Podio co-founder CVs Kasper Huithin. Huithin knew a guy who only wanted to hire lucky people. So he would take all the submitted CVs, put them in a pile, split the pile in half and throw away one of the new piles (half of the CVs!). Likewise, some employers only consult the CVs of candidates whose last name begins with a certain letter of the alphabet.
While other employers may not be so extreme with their resume filtering, some of the tactics they use are just as ineffective. Even filtering resumes through a keyword search isn’t that great. If you search for the word “manager” in all resumes, you’ll miss out on resumes of potentially interesting candidates who have the word “manager” or “management” or “manager” instead.
Other hiring managers scan resumes for signs of past success, such as graduating from a major university. However, many of these success factors depend on money and relationships, which are also not good indicators of how well the candidate is performing in the role you are hiring for.
The interview process
Some people are just good at interviews. They are outgoing and personable, and almost everyone tends to like them. It’s just one of the many biases a hiring manager could bring her with her to an interview according to Pod Consulting:
“Have you ever met someone and once you’ve chatted, have you had any positive feelings about a characteristic they have (like how they look or have a product you like best)? If you are warm to this person because of their characteristic, then everything they say sounds so valid and agrees with you – if you hear something that doesn’t quite match the characteristic, there are strong chances are you ignored it.
Other interview biases include the interviewee’s judgment based on your first impression, stereotypes, and comparing the candidate with other candidates instead of the job requirements.
As humans, hiring managers often decide whether the candidate for the job is a good fit based on instinct, subjectivity and sometimes nepotism over objective criteria as to whether the candidate for employment. the job will actually perform well in the role specified.
The missing piece
In 1984, Hunter and Hunter performed a meta-analysis comparing eleven alternative predictors of job performance for entry-level positions. They found aptitude tests to be the best overall predictor of job performance, with an average validity of 0.53. In contrast, interviews had an average validity of only 0.14 as a predictor, CVs a measly 0.08, for actual job performance.
Yet most hiring practices focus heavily on the skills and personalities of job applicants, not what is most important – whether the job applicant will be a productive part of the company. . In this case, the best case is to wait 12-18 months to see the candidate’s real value.
The Future of Candidate Selection – Tests and Data
With the advent of advanced technology, most jobs are not the same as they were three years ago. Therefore, experience is not as valuable as work ethic and problem-solving ability. Psychometric tests allow employers to identify these traits, by examining job applicants for productivity, before reading a resume. These tests based on actual psychology research offer predictive clues about a person’s actual performance in a given job.
The information received allows employers to properly screen applicants in the first place. They help ask poignant interview questions, and they identify “rough diamond” candidates who would have been overlooked by the pitfalls of the traditional hiring process, in an efficient and cost-effective process.
Big data refers to the process of capturing, preserving, storing, analyzing, and visualizing datasets so large and complex that they cannot be managed with traditional software tools. Companies that use big data to make hiring decisions analyze statistics on turnover, performance, and employee reviews to understand what type of people will perform best in each position. They then use their results to implement hiring assessments, like the one mentioned above, which select candidates for the identified characteristics.
The choice to implement psychometric tests and the collection of data is always optional for the employer. However, their uses are increasing and these two scientific methods are set to change the future of the traditional recruiting process in the coming years.
If you want to learn more about pre-employment psychometric testing, check out www.crème.hr for more details.