The 10 Biggest Mistakes Made in Hiring

Organizations today are beset with high rates of employee turnover, wrongful hiring claims, sexual harassment allegations, workplace violence, employee theft ... the list goes on and on. Such risks are magnified when you hire the wrong person! The wrong person is underqualified, litigious, controlling, insubordinate, and detrimental to an entire firm. Indeed, the seeds of many failed employee-employer relationships are planted during the hiring process.
Within the pages of Hiring Smart (reviewed in the Winter 2000 EPLiC), Dr. Pierre Mornell offers a wealth of prescriptive recommendations—45 specific "do's"—that will increase a firm's chances of hiring effective, productive employees. In this issue, we examine the opposite perspective and share with you some of the most common mistakes—10 "don'ts"—for the hiring process.
It makes no difference whether an organization is large or small, or hiring an entry-level worker or an executive. For example, we've seen a convalescent home unknowingly employ a violent felon: a janitor who kidnapped, raped, and then killed one of its patients. At the other end of the spectrum, we've seen companies hire multimillion-dollar executives; that's not what they cost the company in salary, but how much long-term strategic damage they caused. By avoiding the 10 pitfalls examined in this article, you will be in a better position to prevent the costly mistakes that victimized these organizations.

Clearly Identify Company Needs

When seeking to fill a position, your company must clearly define its goals in terms of skills, experience, character, and competency. Determine the actual, objective standards a candidate must meet, and the requisite educational background, exact work experience, and specific technical skills they must possess. In addition, it is important to evaluate the organization's short-and long-term needs and the effect this particular hiring decision will have upon those needs. Many times, however, an organization's requirements can be more efficiently met through outsourcing or strategic partnering. Don't automatically assume you need a certain type of employee. Test those assumptions before you hire.

Test a Prospective Employee's Skills

Skill testing is a must. Every job has some form of measurable, objective performance standard. Identify it and test for it. A secretary who types 60 words per minute with mistakes will be less effective than a secretary who types 90 words per minute without mistakes. However, if a company fails to test for typing skills, it will have no way of evaluating a prospective employee's ability to perform a specific task. Under these circumstances, a supervisor may criticize the first secretary for lack of productivity, when she is in fact giving her best effort. Unless you test an applicant's skills, you are taking a gamble that they can perform. It's a bet you just may lose.

Avoid Hiring Out of Desperation

Too many hiring decisions are made out of desperation. The following scenarios occur repeatedly: a key manager quits and must be replaced NOW; rapid growth forces a company to fill positions without enough forethought; programmers are so scarce that anyone will do. We've all, in pure desperation, brought someone into an employment relationship only to find out later that they were not trustworthy or competent. Don't fall prey to such fear-based thinking. Rather, consider the alternatives. If you are unable to conduct a thorough, timely hiring process, hire a temporary or leased employee or borrow an employee from another company. But don't hire in haste—you may end up with waste.

Guard Against Hiring Out of Laziness

Despite the high stakes associated with hiring, we often get lazy. Managers who are lazy hire the first remotely suitable person who walks through the door. Often, we simply want to avoid the hiring process altogether. After all, we have jobs to do. Companies and managers must fight this very human tendency to do less rather than more. Alternatively, if you don't want to endure the rigors of the hiring process, then contract with someone else to do it for you. Consider engaging the services of an executive recruiter or search firm. Or delegate this task to a trusted individual within your company.

Watch Out for Infatuation

A series of surveys has revealed that during the hiring process, most interviewers made their decision—up or down—within the first 10 minutes of the interview. They then spent the next 50 minutes internally justifying that decision. We buy cars the same way. First, we choose the car we want to buy—from an emotional standpoint—and then search for objective data to justify that emotional decision. We all know that "facts tell, but emotions sell." Remember, the best con artists attract infatuation. In studies where professional actors are interviewed for jobs for which they have no experience, they are hired at a higher rate than those who have actual qualifications for such positions! Simply because someone "looks" right for the role does not mean they will be. You can guard against infatuation by having coworkers interview prospects, having group interviews, and by conducting follow-up interviews.

Avoid Baggage that Gets in the Way

Everyone carries some baggage. Sometimes, it is the belief that a woman can't operate a forklift, that a man can't be a nurse, or that a minority cannot function as an executive. But baggage is not reality.
Men once dominated orchestras, until they began to conduct "blind auditions" where a curtain was placed in front of the performers. The quality of their sound, not their gender, became the sole evaluation criterion. The preconception about what makes a better musician was removed, and thereafter women were hired at twice the previous rate. It is a fact the best and brightest are not always going to look and act the way you think they should! Seeking diversity is not important simply to placate the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Rather, it has become an absolute necessity in today's competitive economy.

Carefully Evaluate Candidates Recommended by Employees and Associates

Just because someone recommends a person they think would be highly capable for a particular position doesn't mean that person is qualified. We have seen many occasions where someone was hired without going through the usual evaluation process simply because they were recommended by another employee or colleague. Don't let someone else make your hiring decisions for you. Follow the usual channels and requirements when anyone—no matter how highly recommended—seeks to work for your organization.

Do Not Blindly Promote from Within

We are firm believers in promoting from within an organization. However, your best performers aren't necessarily always the most qualified candidates for a specific job. This is especially true when promoting to the management level. Simply because someone is particularly adept at handling a certain function doesn't mean they are capable of managing others. Many a career has gone downhill after such a promotion.
Remember the Peter Principle: organizations frequently promote otherwise capable workers until they reach their own level of incompetence! Make sure your company follows a thorough hiring analysis when promoting from within. Promoting solely from within can create inbreeding and stagnate creativity. To guard against these pitfalls, companies should consider filling at least one-third of all positions involving promotions with people from outside the organization.

Perform Extensive Background and Reference Checks

We are often asked to investigate a claim of harassment, theft, threatened violence, or other workplace misconduct. As part of our investigation, we always review the involved employee's file and evaluate the extent to which a background investigation was conducted. Much more often than not, little or no background information was obtained. Employees with drug problems were never tested prior to hire. Security guards who conspired against their employers were never checked for criminal records. The employers of employees who engaged in wrongful conduct at other companies had never been contacted. Yet, many companies are afraid of engaging in extensive background investigations out of concern for EEOC and legislative privacy mandates. Don't be. Potential problems can be avoided by securing releases from job candidates and/or their previous employers. Refer to Figure 1, a form that authorizes a potential employer to conduct a background check on a job candidate and releases the potential employer from any liability associated with such investigations.




Rakesh prasad
pgdm - 2nd sem