Your point about a disgruntled manager undermining a result might be valid, but that person will present a problem no matter what. I would suggest reading Lou’s additional observations/recommendations (on adlerconcepts) to get a greater sense of the points he was trying to make on accuracy. As usual, they’re very good.

Incidentally, I agree it is not always easy to reach a consensus. You and the hiring manager may have to do some reasoning to explain a hiring decision and overcome objections, but nowhere is it written that you must have unanimity. The objective should be to have ‘buy-in’ from all major stakeholders, and if 3 of them happen to be managers and they are excluded from the evaluation, deal with it.

Accuracy is always much preferred over expediency, or you’ll be hiring mediocre candidates just in the interest of making your numbers. In my humble opinion – coming from as much experience in the business as yourself – everyone is much better served by having the major stakeholders involved with a hire. If you avoid that you’re setting your new hire up to have to deal with resentful colleagues who had no say in the hire. Thereby creating the disgruntlement you described.

I refer to this as the ‘Hung Jury’ syndrome on item #7 in my ‘Maximizing Search Firm Success’ report which was featured on the front cover of TFL this December. (Click
http://www.searchwizardry.com/maximizing.html)

Whenever 3 or more managers must agree – disagreement is more likely. Skeletons in the closet, secret axes to grind, vengeance, jealousy, vindictiveness, egos and numerous other ghosts, demons and goblins surface during such interview events.

If one manager had a lousy review, poor raise, argument with his boss/cooworker (who doesn’t go through this almost every week?) just before the ‘interview’ the ‘interview’ will be where the individual exerts his ability to throw a monkey wrench into the works and garner the attention desired. Sabotage is sweet revenge even if the candidate ‘deserved’ the job.

I’ve seen all too often. And having actually secured, managed and presented hundreds of millions in offers over more than 20+ years gives me the experience to speak from.

Limit interviews to the least amount of managers absolutely necessary or nothing will happen for a very long time. Ultimately, one individual only must possess the authority to break a deadlock.

It’s our duty as Recruiters to coach our candidates through stressful interviews…especially group interviews. One of the very best tactics of progressive, strategic recruiting is the group interview! Instead of breaking down the candidate by sending them through 5-6 interviews over the course of a week and a half, or Hiring Managers trying to compare notes; the group interview allows the Hiring Team to be on the same page, not misinterpret information, and gives the candidate a shorter process. Also, The group interview has a much higher positive outcome than normal one-on-ones (I think it’s an increase of 400%). Most of the top agencies have adopted this method. However, this is only effective if the recruiter is a very capable career coach. I’ve coached some of the most nervous candidates through intimidating group interviews at Fortune 500 companies…and they gotten the job.

End result was we passed on the candidates because they didn’t interview well.

I can see situations where this might work, but most occasions it has failed in my experiences.

Sincerely
Rich Goldberg

Once again you nailed it. I find that many of our clients have failed at the very first step. They never really came to and understanding and agreement on the requirements for the job. While we focus primarily on the behavioral side, tools like the Predictive Index PRO give the hiring team the opportunity to individually define the job and then graphically compare and contracts results. I enjoy facilitating the discussion as they bring their individual models together, often for the first time. Nothing makes the process work better than an accurate and agreed upon goal!

Steve Waterhouse
http://www.predictiveresults.com

Great article… I thought it had some very strong points. Funny enough, we are in the process of implementing a more structured interview process for our company. The process we came up with is similar in a lot of ways? we even use the Profile XT (PXT). It?s been a great tool for us after the initial interview to help the recruiter develop smart questions for the second round of interviews. This part alone has increased the level of talent we are bringing into our company.

While not all of the steps you outlined apply to every company (I have a fundamental differing point of view with panel interviews), I believe taking a thorough approach to sourcing and accessing talent will go a long way in building any organization looking to become an enduring great company.

To greater success ~