Comparing Candidates: Sometimes You've Got to Turn Into a Group Therapist in HR...

Hey everybody!  It's time for a candidate breakdown/comparison session!  Let's get the gang together and nitpick some candidates to death!

Seriously - if you're an HR pro who recruits and want to cut your time to fill, it's time to get the hiring managers/influencers together and compare the candidates. Push them already.  Otherwise, the trail goes cold, and it's hard to get anybody to move - and you'll be 30 days removed from today.

Step one: Get the hiring manager(s) and all people who interviewed the candidates together in one room. Harder than it looks, and let's face it - if you don't do it, no one will.

Step two: Lead the session and tell everyone why they are there.  I recommend something like, "We're meeting because in the past we've delayed making a decision, and it's ultimately cost us the candidate we wanted.  So we're here to go through the candidates, figure out where we are and get an offer out."

I recently did this and had one influencer direct the paraphrased words to me:  "Let's stop messing around", which I think was said more in the spirit of "why are we wasting time with a meeting" than "let's make an offer, already".  The ego side of me might get defensive about that comment, since it implied I was a bureaucrat that valued meetings more than results.  But the more mature and experienced version of KD just sees opportunity in that statement.

Why?  Because I called the meeting because we aren't making offer decisions fast enough (and that person may or may not have been part of the problem). And that statement gives me the license to say the following: "Frank, I agree.  Let's freaking decide now and make people stop laughing at us."

Which leads directly into the remaining steps for the therapy session:

Step three: Compare the trade-offs between candidates, and if the meeting starts with a statement like "Let's stop messing around", it's my job to push the emotional button more. My style on this is to lead the review on a candidate-by-candidate basis, and make everyone talk (hiring manager and influencers alike).  I make each person walk me through the pros/cons of the candidates from their perspectives, then I compare and contrast thoughts and try to draw people out to discuss areas of conflict.  I'm like a marital therapist in that regard ("why don't you express yourself to her more"... ha).

Step four: Drag out the elephant in the room: Relative value for salary level and resulting fit for team and position.  Becky's great, but she cost 10K more than Ralph, who's not as good but is pretty good.  Who's better for us?  It's your job to drag the relative $$ value equation out in the open, or no one will do it.  Make them talk about it and give opinions.  Money concerns and the inability to reconcile the "talent for relative salary" between candidates is a major cause of delay in the hiring process.  If you don't lead this, often no one will.

Step five: Make people vote on the offer(s) they would make after hearing the dialog in question.  Start with the influencers, then end with the hiring manager in question, who will be making the final decision.  (Note: you should have a conversation with the hiring manager in question to ensure he/she understands what you are doing.  At the end of the process, if they are weak and go with the consensus rather than what you heard them say in the session, you might have to jump in and challenge that.  All a part of you driving a transparent process).

In the final stage of the recruiting process, you're one part closer, one part therapist, one part Mom, and one part shark.  You'll need all those things in your DNA to drive people to make a decision/offer at times. 

Be the ball, Danny.

Comments

[Jay D'Aprile]

Kris,

Yes, yes, yes! It is great to see a human resources executive acting as a business leader. Too many times in my role as a retained executive search consultant do I see HR viewed as a facilitator with little power to push the hiring decision. Sometimes I don’t think that executives understand how their indecision can hurt the recruiting process which causes great companies to loose great people. It is good to have someone who can knock some heads/kick some ass! Keep it up! http://theheadhuntersvoice.blogspot.com/

[KTP]

You get top marks for this post simply for throwing up a Concrete Blonde cover...

Good recommendations on how to over-come hiring stall.

[Nick]

I agree with this method. It always helps to get a second opinion, no matter what the issue is. One person may see something (good or bad) in the candidate that another person may not have seen; and this way, no important details about the candidate will go unnoticed.

[jan]

Here's a thought...Including the resume and interview process, what about adding a high performance model through scientific-based assessments? They reveal individual learning patterns, behavorial traits, and occupational interests, as well as suggest specific interviewing questions and managaing/coaching tips?

Thoughts?

[Sue Corralz]

Kudos to you on all of your points! I’d suggest that another valuable outcome of these sessions is identifying items that will help with successful on-boarding and eventual new-hire performance. First – when candidate shortcomings are discussed, determine whether they are deal breakers or opportunities to develop a candidate on the job. If the latter, make someone (e.g., hiring manager) accountable for making those developmental opportunities happen. Second – if interviewers picked up on intangible hot-points for the selected candidate, include those in your offer process. For example, customize the original job description to include a project that would use the candidate’s special skill set or new technical area they want exposure to.

http://www.banyanjackson.com

[robjannone]

Step 5: Offer them Girl Scout cookies during the candidate review session ;)

[robjannone]

whoops; meant Step Six!