A senior manager at a fitness company that makes a top-rated workout app told me recently how she determines whether a job candidate would be a good fit for her team.
Whether she is hiring for marketing or brand operations, she avoids the cookie-cutter interview questions that are expected and typical. Instead, she jumps right in, presenting the candidate with an exercise in critical thinking: “Here’s the problem I’m trying to solve with this role, and here’s what jumped out on your profile: I’d like to understand more about xyz.”
Even job applicants whose résumés glisten with impressive posts at top companies often stumble when confronted with real-time problem-solving. “I don’t really care about their background in the end,” she says. “I care about how they think.”
For many managers, so-called “halo” hires who bring an accomplished history layered with extensive experience at Big Tech companies, may often seem heaven-sent. This manager, though, isn’t swayed by a high-flying CV festooned with jobs at prestigious organizations.
Sure, working at unicorn startups or established powerhouses has given these applicants an edge beyond the prestige factor. Besides technical know-how, they’ve probably developed strategies to navigate high-pressure ecosystems that involve interacting with colleagues with equally impressive pedigrees.
But should a halo résumé always rise to the top? In many cases, the right candidate may be hiding in plain sight, somewhere in the middle of the pile. Their work history may lack brand prestige, but it might indicate a skill set that features a broader if more eclectic, range of talents.
Outstanding technical skills will always be essential in our fast-moving information age. But being at the top of the class is not enough. Not anymore.
Let me explain.
Top-flight might mean narrow scope
As head of Global Talent Acquisition at Deel, I lead hiring for a fast-growing HR & payroll company that helps businesses hire, pay, and manage teams globally. I oversee a team that sifts through some 120,000+ applications each month. This year, we will hire only 1,000+ of those candidates for jobs ranging from customer success managers in EMEA to payroll experts in Africa. The competition to work with us is intense.
Given my background leading recruiting teams for name-brand companies, I recognize the importance of attracting top-shelf hires. But I’ve also learned that applicants with halo résumés might have only narrow experience that may not meet the multifaceted needs of growth-stage companies.
For example, we’ve seen halo candidates who, after some probing, appeared to have been merely a cog in the wheel, with little influence, at their previous marquee company. Despite excellent tech skills, they lacked other crucial abilities necessary at companies with a smaller workforce.
Startups and growth-stage companies often need nimble people who can identify how best to deploy their experience or know-how where needed most. We expect our hires to be able to identify, and then pivot to solve, problems that may not be in their direct areas of expertise. And we need them to fit into our culture, which means adjusting to a fast-moving, scrappy workplace.
Halo hires can backfire
In short, we look for people with a broad palette of talents. Where a large, incumbent enterprise may encourage workers to focus on narrowly defined problems, we count on our staff to broaden their skills. Throughout my career, I’ve seen countless halo hires who have trouble adapting to the “roll-up-your-sleeves” dynamic required at startups.
Remember, adding shiny CVs to your workplace roster may look good, but it can backfire. To bring aboard halo hires with the idea that they will eventually adjust to your culture does them—and you—no favors.
Besides critical-thinking ability, the fitness company executive I spoke with keeps an eye out for candidates who demonstrate effective communication skills. With little time to train new hires, she counts on a recruit to ask questions and leaves plenty of time to answer them. “People reveal a lot about themselves with their questions,” she says.
In my case, when considering a candidate, I’ve learned to ask myself: What is the main problem I’m looking to solve? Do I need someone who will bring structure or refinement to our process? Does this person present a set of functional attributes, such as well-honed work habits, that can help us achieve our goals?
Forget the 30-minute interview
So how do you zero in on a candidate who will be right for your company?
Interviewers tend to think they are good at interviewing, but when you look at their hiring records, the results may be mixed. New hires leaving within the first year can vary per company, often between 10-20%; however, I’ve seen examples of that number reaching as high as 60%!
Examining your company’s hiring record is a necessary self-check. It’s important to understand the root cause of these leavers, as they can often tell you a lot about your hiring practices and what profile is likely to be successful and motivated at your organization.
Don’t get me wrong. Sometimes the haloed candidate really is the best choice. But don’t let the stars get in your eyes and fail to see the truly good candidates who are out there—in abundance.
Here’s another way to improve results: Banish the 30-minute interview. After obligatory introductions, hiring managers can only evaluate the headline credentials of the candidate, and often scratch at the surface level. This leaves precious little time to pose the questions that count. Extend those initial encounters to 45 minutes. You’ll need at least that long to understand how a would-be hire could add value to your organization.
And another point: How often have you started an interview and decided within the first three to five minutes if you like the candidate, and spent the rest of the time trying to prove they were right with their initial assessment? Our biases move into overdrive with this practice, so please take the allotted time to truly understand the candidate.
Instead, try to use this time to objectively evaluate their functional skills (technical or job-related skills that are necessary to perform tasks within a particular role); practices (specific methods, techniques, or processes to achieve specific goals); behaviors (interpersonal or soft skills to work effectively with others in a collaborative environment); and business impact (the overall results obtained as a direct contribution for their work).
Let the most promising interviewees talk. Give them the time. In the end, it will be well worth your time.
No comments