Hiring Frustration #1: What Am I Measuring?

Most Job Descriptions are Worthless as a tool for predicting future success!

MINIMUM EXPECTATIONS

Most job descriptions define nothing more than minimum, average, and mediocre standards. If the goal is to hire top talent, then you must be able to define the expectations of top talent. Consider the fact that the vast majority of job descriptions define years of experience needed in the job, minimum educational requirements, skills and knowledge needed, generic and undefined attributes and behaviors. This is not a job description. It has nothing to do with the job. It’s a people description. And the worst news of all is that it defines minimum-average-mediocre expectations not top talent expectations.

RANDOM RESULTS

Not only is this the NUMBER ONE frustration among hiring managers and executives, it is also the NUMBER ONE reason hiring fails. In presenting to over 30,000 hiring executives and managers in the last two decades, most of those workshop participants have told us their track record in hiring is abou 50/50. Sometimes they hire good people and sometimes they don’t.

How can you have any decent level of business success when you’re results are basically random. You might as well be standing at the crap tables in Vegas throwing dice. Is there any other process in your business where you will accept that level of random variability – such as your payroll checks or the bills you send to customers? Probably not! Then why do most managers and executives accept random results from hiring.

There are a number of reasons, but topping the list is the frustration and mistake over not defining success. Most hiring executives and managers would contend that they do not understand how to define results, expectations, outcomes, and deliverables that can be used as a predictive approach to determining the success of a potential candidate. Since most do not have a method for determing/defining success, they fall back on the tribal approach of using a traditional job description – a document that has existed from the early days of human resource management.

A BETTER APPROACH TO DEFINING SUCCESS

A better approach is to define outcomes, deliverables, and expectations that link back to the team, group, department, and company/organizational goals and objectives. NOT defining the outcomes is an abdication of strong management and leadership.

We use an approach in our Success Factor Methodology called S.O.A.R, which provides a structured approach to defining success. After having “field-tested” this approach and methodology for the last two decades, we’ve seen thousands of companies dramatically improve their hiring accuracy and ability to hire candidates who deliver the results desired.

RESOURCES TO HELP YOU GET STARTED IN DEFINING SUCCESS

Our S.O.A.R. template can help guide you through the process of defining success for any role within your company.

There are multiple FREE examples of Success Factor Snapshots using the S.O.A.R. approach in our FREE Resources Library.

In our Internet Radio Programs for Hiring Managers, Tele-Conferences, and Webinars, Brad and are constantly sharing ideas, thoughts, and strategies around using Success-based Job Definitions to improve hiring and retention. Take a look at some of the FREE downloads in our Hiring Manager Audio Library.

DOES YOUR COMPANY HAVE WHAT IT TAKES TO HIRE TOP TALENT?

Does your company define quantifiable and time-based outcomes, deliverables, and expectations before the first candidate is interviewed, let alone hired?

Related posts:

1. An Easy Hiring Mistake To Fix
2. Hiring Frustration #2: Not Enough Candidates
3. Why Hiring Fails: Hiring Mistake #1 – Inadequate Job Descriptions