When
it comes to hiring a key employee, sometimes executives believe that taking a
“360 degree view” will help in making a better informed selection. Accordingly,
finalist candidates are introduced to an array of people from both inside and
outside the organization. The rationale is that a multi-faceted screening
process will be helpful in evaluating candidates; and, once a candidate is
selected, to help encourage this individual to join the organization.
However,
there are times when the law of unintended consequences can interfere with these best
laid plans.
Let’s take a closer look at the pros and cons of using multiple people to screen when tasked with candidate selection.
Let’s take a closer look at the pros and cons of using multiple people to screen when tasked with candidate selection.
Outside Assessment
By
definition, outside observers are expected to offer unbiased perspectives of
the organization, its relationships and its needs. These observers are
considered objective, and thus able to offer a non-emotional view of the impact
of a hiring decision. Additionally, outsiders frequently bring helpful views on
the the skills and experience needed to fill a job.
On
the other hand, outsiders are typically less current about the business or
industry, and less informed than are people who work in the business on a
day-to-day basis.
The View from Inside
There
are several positive factors for including insiders in the candidate selection
process. Firstly, they can present a welcoming tone to candidates. People
within the organization are also often useful to screen in determining
whether there is a cultural fit. Certainly, insiders’ participation in the
process can foster “buy-in.” Plus, any complaints after the hire about a
selection would hopefully be less strident if insiders are involved in the
screening at the outset. Another benefit to involving inside assessors in
screening is that this can reinforce a sense of positive openness and a “no
secrets” environment among the team.
On
the other hand, it is important to remember that insiders can bring particular
biases into the selection process. When considering a candidate as a potential
co-worker, views about which candidate fits best can surface in an interfering
way—intentionally or unintentionally. Also, some individuals can be threatened
by the presence of a candidate who might appear to be stronger than they are in
a particular discipline. These insiders may discourage candidates in subtle or
not so subtle ways.
Depending
upon their position within the organization, some internal assessors may lack a
strategic perspective. If they are limited to one internal function and are
asked to take a broad business view, they might misread the importance of
relevant aspects of a candidate's background. Also, internal people
sometimes only “know what they know.” If they lack broad exposure to other
disciplines and organizations, they might not understand fully the background
of an individual who comes from a different or broader environment. In these
instances, it may help to have each person who screens take a more specific line of
inquiry with the candidate.
Maximizing
Perspectives
The
first step in involving multiple insiders and outsiders is to make certain that all
interviewers are trained and well prepared for the task. The interviewing
process consists of a lot more than simply asking questions and listening to
responses. Formal training in evaluating candidates and in eliminating unfair
or discriminatory behavior in an interviewing setting is prudent.
Outsiders
and insiders both offer excellent opportunities for gaining perspectives, and in
selling finalist candidates on the wisdom of their joining the organization. If
you avoid common pitfalls, you can maximize the opportunities of using multiple interviewers in your hiring process.