Comments on: Behavioral Interviewing Can Be Accurate, But Only When Done Right

By: Bruce Jorgensen

Bruce Jorgensen — Fri, 18 Aug 2006 03:54:00 +0000

…and how often does a new hire do more than ‘get by’? The 2003 Recruiting Roundtable study of over 28,000 new hires suggests that only about 7% are given a top performance rating in their first appraisal. That figure is the result of approximately 50% who are successfully matched to the job specs, about 30% who are matched to the company culture, and only about 10% who successfully ‘navigate early challenges’ coming on board. The overlap of these approximate figures yields the 7% early successes. By focusing on candidate-job matches one ignores the limiting condition of onboarding success. So, work for Corning, Intuit or other companies who have realized the importance of the assimilation process, or add an onboard coaching component to your searches.

By: David Lynn

David Lynn — Fri, 18 Aug 2006 01:23:00 +0000

First, good article on BI. I find it to be the most effective model and, as such, it is my interviewing style of choice.

Regarding the comments on retention, Marjorie and Wendell both make interesting points, they frame the contrast between what a Recruiter position ‘really’ is, and what it becomes when the other parties (i.e. HR and hiring management) need someone to blame to cover their own incompetencies.

To those HR and hiring managers who want to hold someone in an internal Recruiting role accountable for retention issues, I say ‘absolutely!’ – but first show the Recruiter a carrot instead of just the stick!

If Recruiting is expected to share in the blame of retention issues, then Recruiting should share in the success of their efforts, too. In a corporate setting, why not specifically bonus the internal Recruiters based on their hires’ subsequent performance ratings and/or getting promoted?

It would be great if someone would respond with an example of how Recruiting successfully impacted retention issues and how they were rewarded for their efforts.

Thanks,

By: Karen Mattonen C.A.C., C.S.P

Karen Mattonen C.A.C., C.S.P — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 09:13:00 +0000

Marjorie..
excellent comments.. no need to repeat..

One question — why is it that so many who don’t understand the Recruiting world has so much to say about it?

Really, the Executive search individuals who only base the validity of their candidates by the length of their Replacement Guarantee.. well those are considered One Hit wonders..

Really.. As a TPR — I would not want to mess with the Behavioral Interview.. maybe as a Staffing firm, or co employer.. but why would I want to deal with the Legal Problems that can come from this.. Stir up a hornets nest.. Nah, I think I will leave that to the client.. that is why I present the best that I can and let them determine ‘the accuracy’

Karen M.

By: Jonathan Hefferlin

Jonathan Hefferlin — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 07:56:00 +0000

Great article, good retorts to all the criticism, which will undoubtedly get some lively responses.
Remember, the opposite of love is apathy. Always nice to stir up the passions in too often apathetic folks. Keep up the good work. Most of us love you, although I have been guilty of joking Harvard is a great place for folks who can’t get a job.
Oxford (Elementary School)grad., Jon

By: Dr. Wendell Williams

Dr. Wendell Williams — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 05:25:00 +0000

Marjorie raises two good questions.

One: What is the role of a recruiter?

I’ll let each individual answer that for themselves. However, as a consulting ‘weenie’, when I ask about who is reponsible for low performing employees, I consistently hear three kinds of responses:

1)Recruiters: ?We?re only sourcers who screen applicants by asking questions.?
2)HR Staff: ?Low performers are products of a hostile working environment.?
3) Line Managers: ?HR and recruiters keep sending us poor employees…they cannot learn, are unmotivated, make bad decisions, cannot get along with team members, and have poor work ethic.?

Now..Which of these three sources do you think has the most political clout??

Two: What are the true Professional Recruiting Standards?

Published hiring and promotion standards have been around since 1978. You won’t like them, but you can find them here:

http://www.dol.gov/dol/allcfr/ESA/Title_41/Part_60-3/toc.htm

and here:
http://www.apa.org/science/standards.html

By: Marjorie Mancini

Marjorie Mancini — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 04:10:00 +0000

True – Finding an overall Recruiting ‘Professional Standard’ is a difficult task since it seems to depend on the thoroughness of the recruiter and the hiring managers. However, I wonder if you (or your sources) are confused on the function of recruiting both internal and 3rd party. When you stated in your article:
‘On the other hand, professional recruiters have proudly told me, ‘We measure success by each candidate who survives the guarantee period.’ Professionals who only do enough to get by? That doesn’t sound like any profession I know. Maybe it’s just me, but I think this kind of self-serving agenda is unethical.’
It seems like this statement may be out of content from a different subject. The recruiting function does not include Hiring Retention. This is an HR, corporate environment, team management issue for the most part. The recruitment function is to source, locate, pre-qualify, schedule interviews, salary/package negotiation assistance, etc. – all of the tasks that lead up to the point of hire. Once the candidate is employed, it is up to the internal team and the employee to maintain the relationship. With this said, the recruiter is not off the hook completely. When representing the open position to potential candidates, the recruiter must have due diligence in representing the company and its environment accurately, as well as, understand the candidate’s qualifications and intentions in their job search to make a good referral to the hiring manager. Recruiters can also assist hiring mangers in their hiring choices with thorough representation, interviewing coaching, designing competitive compensation packages, hiring trend information, etc.

I find your thoughts on Behavioral Interviewing interesting. Coming up with a true Recruiting Professional standard (if possible) would be an invaluable asset to growing organizations.