A major mistake occurs in the hiring process when interviewing candidates. There is a tendency to equate, extrapolate, and extend experience to be the same as results. There is an enormous gap between experience and results. Historical experience DOES NOT EQUAL results.
A candidate who has obtained results will have “enough” historical experience; however, the candidate who has lots of historical experience may not have obtained good results.
A high percentage of hiring executives and managers make the mistake of accepting historical experience as proof of obtaining results. This mistaken perception leads to the hiring of candidates who are only “partially competent.” They can’t walk the talk!
Have you ever hired a candidate who had all the boxes checked on the job description for the experiences you listed, but couldn’t get the results you needed in the job? This hiring mistake is Number 5 on our list of the Top Ten Hiring Mistakes – Historical Bias. Many hiring executives and managers have trouble making the leap to measuring and validating a candidate’s past results in the interview (perhaps they never been trained, or read our book, or attended our workshop – You’re NOT the Person I Hired). They fall victim to having an interview bias toward historical experience instead of results.
You might want to view our series on hiring mistakes starting with:
Can You Avoid the Most Common Hiring Mistakes?
Interviewing Candidates Like You Would Pick a Heart Surgeon
Suppose you need emergency heart surgery to open a blocked artery, and you have a choice of two surgeons.
The first surgeon has 20 years’ of experience and has performed more than 1,000 open-heart procedures. The second is only in his third year of practice and has less than 50 procedures under his belt.
At first glance, the more experienced surgeon would seem the obvious choice. But what if you knew this surgeon has only a 50 percent survival rate, while the second has yet to lose a patient?
Think it might change your choice of surgeons?
Experience Does Not Equal Results
As we mentioned earlier, there’s a big difference between experience and results.
Failure to understand this difference, is the primary cause behind Hiring Mistake #5: Historical Bias.
Historical bias occurs when hiring managers base their primary hiring decision on past experience/past history when assessing job candidates. They use past experience rather than past success to guide their hiring decisions.
What’s the difference?
Past experience is being in a certain role, having a certain skill or possessing certain knowledge based on years of collecting it, doing it and using it. Past success is the application of that skill, knowledge and experience.
For example, I may have spent the last 15 years developing my computer skills, which looks great on the resume. But unless you go beyond that experience and look at my actual success in applying those skills on the job during that timeframe, you have no way of knowing whether I can apply those computer skills to produce the specific results you need in your company.
You Make False Assumptions in Measuring Candidate Past Experience
In most cases, historical bias results from false assumptions regarding the candidate’s ability to perform on the job.
Let’s play this out in an example. Suppose you want to hire an sales professional. When you take a historical approach to hiring, you assume that if the candidate has worked in sales in a specific industry for a particular period of time, he should be very effective at selling in that industry, in that channel, and to the people who buy that product.
The problem with this assumption is that it doesn’t measure the candidate’s past success against the results you need in your environment. All you’ve done is check off the fact that the candidate has 12 years of experience in your industry, AND you made the FALSE ASSUMPTION that he’s a good sales rep because he has done it for so long. For all you know, he could be a lousy salesperson with a sales manager who tolerates mediocrity.
Have you ever made this mistake? Stupid question – of course you’ve make this mistake. In over 2,000 presentations over the last two and half decades, and over 1,000 executive search projects, I have yet to meet a hiring executive or manager who will not readily raise their hand on that question. In fact, most hiring executives and managers will admit to making this mistake over and over.
Here’s a more painful question: how many of the managers who work for you keep making this same mistake?
Hiring based on past, historical, and chronological experience has another problem: the lack of objective measurement criteria.
The traditional process of assessing candidates is based on the wrong assumption of “haves.” Do you have “X” amount of this knowledge with this product, or distribution channel? Do you have “Y” years of performing this particular task? Do you have “Z” amount of work in this niche, industry or segment?
These criteria may or may not lead to success. But you’ll never know for sure since you aren’t measuring the candidate’s past success, and you aren’t relating it to what you need on the job.
Eliminate Historical Bias
To avoid Hiring Mistake #5, and the false assumptions of past experience, DO THE FOLLOWING:
- Define the success you’re looking for in the future. Go beyond the traditional hiring criteria of education, credentials and years of experience and define the success factors for the job. These are the quantifiable, measurable results you need for that specific position. (see: Overcoming Hiring Mistake #1: Inadequate Job Descriptions.)
- Validate comparable and similar successes the candidate has achieved. During the interview, ask success-based questions that get the candidate to illustrate how they have produced similar results to the ones you’re looking for. Ask for multiple examples of those results.
- Draw a bridge between the two. Determine whether the candidate’s past successes are good predictors of the future results you need accomplished. If the candidate has produced similar, comparable and like results, he should be able to produce the results you have defined.
Keep in mind that you’ll never find a candidate who has accomplished the same exact success that you’ve defined as a result needed in the job. Instead, look for examples of past successes that are similar in size, scope, effort, time frame, complexity, budget and number of people involved. The more closely the examples match your defined success factors (expected results), the more predictive they will be of future success on the job.”
Does this mean that hiring executives and managers should throw experience, knowledge and credentials out the window?
Of course it doesn’t mean that. Many jobs require a certain credential, professional designation or experience with a particular product. Just don’t base your hiring decision solely on historical and past experience.
Keep in mind that past experience is not a proven predictor of success for your job opening. Past success/results, and how they help predict whether a candidate can succeed in your work environment, will always lead to better hiring decisions.
What’s your action plan to eliminate Hiring Mistake #5: Historical Bias – from the interview tactics used by other executives and managers in your organization? One of our previous posts got to the issue of how you can STOP all your executives and managers from making this hiring mistake and the other 9 from our Top Ten List:
An Easy Hiring Mistake to Fix
Consider taking our FREE Hiring Assessment to determine if you have an effective hiring process designed to hire top talent. Click here to take the FREE Hiring Assessment.
Barry Deutsch
P.S. You might consider reading our FREE e-book on hiring top talent, a best selling guide in the hands of over 15,000 CEOs and Key Executives worldwide who have dramatically improved their hiring accuracy.
Hiring Mistakes | bradremillard February 23, 2012 | 
Comments (0) 
