Assessments help match candidates and job profiles
In the process of selecting, interviewing and hiring, there is a lot of subjective thinking going on. Just think of what your managers tell you about an applicant who makes the grade and gets hired, or what is said about those who leave the office, having failed to make the right impression.
Other than education, work history, proximity and skills, hiring is all about how managers “feel” about the candidate. Too much emphasis is placed on whether they “like” the applicant as opposed to how they will fit in and produce in the position.
If they approve, managers’ comments range from, “a really nice person, pleasant, friendly, witty, sharp, engaging, seems like a good fit.” This type of conversation has a flow to it, as the manager is relieved to have found a good candidate at the end of a long hiring process.
If they disapprove of the applicant, the conversation gets shorter. “Nah, doesn’t fit, seemed to be nervous, experience does not match.” Frustration underlines the conversation because the recruitment process must go on. This involves more time interviewing, reviewing dozens of resumés or paying a head hunter a lot of money to filter out the ones who show promise.
All of this is very subjective. When asked to expand on any of their reasons whether to hire or not, people are hard pressed to define their feelings. This is because people are subjective by nature.
Fortunately, HR can add a solid dose of objectivity to the process by using assessments (or, dare I say, psychological evaluations). The web-based variety make for a better experience as the applicant can be scheduled, the instrument completed, matched against a profile of the position, with the resultant data in the hands of those who will be involved, without delay. The applicant can complete this from home or at the employer’s office.
When the data is read and understood, it goes a long way towards taking the subjective opinions out of the equation. Questions are more focused on fit between the position and the applicant, and the interviewer is able to remain focused, detached and much more objective.
Building the profile or benchmark of what the position requires can be a very positive process. It helps companies realize the changes that have occurred within the various functions. The profile can be built in several ways. Top performers can provide a blueprint for ideal candidates. After all, those who do well at a certain type of work resemble others who are well matched against that position.
An analysis of the position, using questions that force people to think of the elements that make up the position requirements versus how they would do the job, is another option.
Using categories, employers can score — using a basic one to 10 rating system — the importance of various factors. It is the categories, or types of information, that make assessments objective. When you are able to see where someone fits in these categories, you are able to not only select, interview and hire, but to also coach, promote, retain and plan for succession planning.
Some categories include:
•learning index — an index of expected learning, reasoning and problem-solving potential;
•verbal reasoning — using words as a basis in reasoning and problem solving;
•numeric reasoning — using numbers as a basis in reasoning and problem solving;
•assertiveness — tendency to take charge of people and situations;
•manageability — tendency to follow policies, accept external controls and supervision and work within the rules;
•decisiveness — using available information to make decisions quickly; and
•objective judgment — the ability to think clearly and be objective.
Your existing practices have brought you to where you are now. But in these changing times, everything must be re-examined. Assessments should not count for more than 30 per cent of the hiring decision, but they play a very important role in the selection process, helping people to get away from “liking” the applicant to “seeing” what they can actually contribute.
Richard Morin is the principal of www.strategicbusinessservices.net in Barrie, Ont. He can be reached at (866) 919-0400 or [email protected].
Other than education, work history, proximity and skills, hiring is all about how managers “feel” about the candidate. Too much emphasis is placed on whether they “like” the applicant as opposed to how they will fit in and produce in the position.
If they approve, managers’ comments range from, “a really nice person, pleasant, friendly, witty, sharp, engaging, seems like a good fit.” This type of conversation has a flow to it, as the manager is relieved to have found a good candidate at the end of a long hiring process.
If they disapprove of the applicant, the conversation gets shorter. “Nah, doesn’t fit, seemed to be nervous, experience does not match.” Frustration underlines the conversation because the recruitment process must go on. This involves more time interviewing, reviewing dozens of resumés or paying a head hunter a lot of money to filter out the ones who show promise.
All of this is very subjective. When asked to expand on any of their reasons whether to hire or not, people are hard pressed to define their feelings. This is because people are subjective by nature.
Fortunately, HR can add a solid dose of objectivity to the process by using assessments (or, dare I say, psychological evaluations). The web-based variety make for a better experience as the applicant can be scheduled, the instrument completed, matched against a profile of the position, with the resultant data in the hands of those who will be involved, without delay. The applicant can complete this from home or at the employer’s office.
When the data is read and understood, it goes a long way towards taking the subjective opinions out of the equation. Questions are more focused on fit between the position and the applicant, and the interviewer is able to remain focused, detached and much more objective.
Building the profile or benchmark of what the position requires can be a very positive process. It helps companies realize the changes that have occurred within the various functions. The profile can be built in several ways. Top performers can provide a blueprint for ideal candidates. After all, those who do well at a certain type of work resemble others who are well matched against that position.
An analysis of the position, using questions that force people to think of the elements that make up the position requirements versus how they would do the job, is another option.
Using categories, employers can score — using a basic one to 10 rating system — the importance of various factors. It is the categories, or types of information, that make assessments objective. When you are able to see where someone fits in these categories, you are able to not only select, interview and hire, but to also coach, promote, retain and plan for succession planning.
Some categories include:
•learning index — an index of expected learning, reasoning and problem-solving potential;
•verbal reasoning — using words as a basis in reasoning and problem solving;
•numeric reasoning — using numbers as a basis in reasoning and problem solving;
•assertiveness — tendency to take charge of people and situations;
•manageability — tendency to follow policies, accept external controls and supervision and work within the rules;
•decisiveness — using available information to make decisions quickly; and
•objective judgment — the ability to think clearly and be objective.
Your existing practices have brought you to where you are now. But in these changing times, everything must be re-examined. Assessments should not count for more than 30 per cent of the hiring decision, but they play a very important role in the selection process, helping people to get away from “liking” the applicant to “seeing” what they can actually contribute.
Richard Morin is the principal of www.strategicbusinessservices.net in Barrie, Ont. He can be reached at (866) 919-0400 or [email protected].
