Would You Hire Sarah Palin?

Tweet

Dao: This depends on the job. Any job with a fair amount of responsibility should come with a reference and background check. The bigger the job, the further back the checks should go. At the corporate officer level, go back all the way to education. We've all seen the stories of CEOs with false education credentials. Don't let that happen to you.

Cooper: The importance of background checks varies depending on the type of job. You don't want someone with recent theft convictions in positions where they are responsible for large amounts of money, or there is easy access to bank accounts. Similarly, if you are hiring someone into a position that works with children you want to be sure you aren't placing the kids at risk.  Background checks can be an important step to show you are trying to be responsible in who you hire. 

Baldoni: I want to know what a person has achieved as well as where he or she has failed. You want to know what about the achievement he or she did. How responsible for outcomes was this individual. Also, what did he or she learn about a failure? You don't ask about failure as a "gotcha" question. You ask to learn more about resilience and inner resolve.

Alter: Unlike the stock market, where past performance is not a predictor of future performance, past performance is very relevant when hiring employees. The more you can dig up about the candidate's past as it relates to potential work performance, the better. As for background checks, they are critically important. The importance of doing background checks, however, depends in part on the nature of the position.

When are multiple interviews necessary? How many people should be involved in a typical hiring decision?  

Greeleaf: Every time. We like to include interviews with at least three people for every position we hire.

Dao: The bigger the job, the more thorough the hiring process should be.

Cooper: The typical hiring decision should involve at least two interviewers. It is important to get various perspectives on the candidates. No one person is always going to be spot on in their assessments of an individual. 

Baldoni: Many organizations like to have team members, or co-workers, interview. This gives the candidate and the employees a good sense of each other. Some may fit, others may not.

Alter: A top executive who will have a lot of responsibility within an organization requires more substantial vetting than a new hire who will be one of, say, a dozen employees with the same job responsibilities. A single interview conducted by one member of the company can be very misleading. The more interviews, within reason, the less likely you are to make a hiring mistake. I also like to have people outside of the company interview candidates on occasion. It's good to get that outside perspective before you pull the trigger on a new hire.

Can an employer fill a position too quickly? Can the search take too long?

Greenleaf: Yes to both. It's way too easy to hire too quickly. The risks are too great to rush a hire. It can also take too long -- you can burn yourself or your staff out if it takes too long.  If it's not working, change some assumptions and look at your need in a different way.

Dao: Yes and yes. Some entrepreneurs are so desperate to hire, that they bring on idiots.  Others dread the hiring process and end up putting it off for so long that it hurts their growth.

Cooper: A reactionary hire is frequently a disaster. That is the hire when you are "reacting" to a need or a situation. It's important to make sure you have used the recruiting method that gives you the best pool of candidates and take the time to weigh all the candidates and their qualifications.

Baldoni: The right person can walk through the door and bingo! But if the process is too lengthy it means the organization does not have its act together. Either individuals or the team is not ready to bring someone on board. Such lack of decisiveness is not a positive.

Alter: Hire slow, fire quick. That's good advice for employers. If you hire too quickly, it's very easy to make a mistake, especially if you skip crucial hiring steps such as checking references and performing background checks. When hiring, you need to avoid any sense of desperation. Make sure you know what you want and take the time to find the right candidate. Move slowly but surely. Having said that, don't let the perfect get in the way of the good. A job search that drags on is a lost business opportunity.

How do you know when you’ve found the right person for the job?

Greenleaf: That's pretty hard to explain. It's not just a feeling you get, but that's part of it.  There has to be evidence that this person has done or can do the job you need them to do.

Baldoni: Sometimes it's chemistry, other times it's competency. In all honesty, you want a blending of both.

Cooper: Sometimes it really does just come down to your impressions of the individual, all things being equal.  Knowing when you have the right person is a risk, so it is best to get enough information in the interview process (don't forget references) to make an informed decision.

Dao: I don’t think there is a magic moment.  Assessments can help, but at some point you have to make your best guess decision.

Alter: It's not possible. Hiring is not an exact science. The person you think is the right person may not turn out to be the right person for the job. All you can do is hedge your bets. The more you do your homework on a candidate, and the better your gut feel is for a candidate, the higher the probability that you'll find the right person for the job.

 PREV  1 | 2