... in 60 seconds

“If I had known this, I never would have hired him”

You have short listed a superstar with an offer on the table “subject to reference check”.

A reference check should be as comprehensive as a candidate interview. You are trying to verify the same information you get from the candidate through another source. However, a phone reference check is limited by time, hence information is limited.

Here is a solution

Some time ago I was recruiting a CEO for one of my long term clients. It was a crucial role, so had to be the right candidate. There was no room for a mistake. I offered a 12-month guarantee, therefore, if the candidate fell off 11 Recruitment would lose money too.

We found a superstar! Everything looked great from all the digging we could do. So the job was offered “subject to reference checking”. We had a long list of questions for the referee, way too many for a normal phone call.

Unusual approach

So, we created a reference check form for the candidate to complete. We asked the candidate to complete our questions the way he thought the referees would answer.

The candidate completed the form. Sure, it took the candidate a couple of hours to complete, but after 3 interviews he was keen on the role. He also knew this was the last hurdle to overcome. The candidate was compelled to tell the truth because the chances of being caught lying were very high and he knew the consequences.

Contact the referee

We emailed the completed form to the referees, asking them to verify what the candidate had written. It took them 10 minutes to read with no writing from them – easy. The referees emailed it back “all verified”. I then called the referee for a 10 minute discussion. We had a short, in-depth conversation, covering more information than we could in a 2 hour reference check.

12 months later, both the client and I said:

“Glad we hired him!”

It takes a lot of digging to eliminate a candidate who looks sensational yet is not up to expectations, but it's worth it. You will hire more superstars than duds!

My 60 seconds are up.

... in 60 seconds

A client said to me recently

“The last manager we hired was a disaster.
We had to part but we lost key people in the process”

Typically, it's the individual's behaviour that isn't right, not their skill set.

Assessing a candidate’s behaviour prior to appointing them can minimise the risk of a painful, unsuccessful and ultimately costly hire.

Behavioural assessment

Gut feeling is important, but it should not stand alone. Recruitment is about verification of information from multiple independent sources; having an independent behavioural profiling system (such as DISC) is a big help.

DISC is simple, accurate and inexpensive

3 types of management styles

However, each had different management styles. Only one was right – the other two would have been a potentially disastrous hire.

Let’s look at my 3 candidates

The main differences are the "low" traits.

Ideal candidate

My client needed a Team Builder. The business was running well. The team had been there for a long time and was performing. Staff were steadily achieving targets in a reasonably stable environment.

However

A Challenge/Change Manager would have faced the risk of losing valuable staff and momentum, as a result, a downturn in sales and an increase in costs would have occured.

Likewise, an Entrepreneur would possibly have dismantled systems, policies and procedures established based on quality assurance and past experience. An equally expensive hire.

Your next recruitment drive 

I recommend that you create a behavioural job profile. Look at each duty in isolation; determine what behaviour is desired and what you would like to avoid.

 1) Explore each behaviour profile equally during the interview.

 2) Make an independent observation by asking them to complete a behavioural profile.  

 3) Match the 2 profiles against the job profile.

There is a saying:

"Skills get you hired, behaviour gets you fired"

Let’s make it:

"Behaviour gets you hired and no firing required!” 

My 60 seconds are up.

Found it valuable?

...in 60 seconds

We offer bonuses to motivate staff

It works sometimes.
Why not every time?

"Double" motivation

​ 

There is a saying: we walk towards what we seek (a bonus), however we run away from what we fear (a fire).

Hence fear is a stronger motivator than rewards

Desire and fear

So, if we really want to motivate people, we have to use both, in combination. e.g. we tell the sales person that if they

Loss aversion

This is also called "loss aversion". Once someone has something they fear losing it. They will protect much more what they have rather than try to get more. More is a nicety, but often just that

DISC

DISC is a behavioural profiling system. Different profiles - different desires and different fears. Hence, it is a great management and recruitment tool.  

If you know your employees' profiles it is much easier to decide how to motivate them.  

Conclusion

Management is about changing people's behaviour - to get them to do something they would not have done otherwise.

If you don’t make them change behaviour - you don’t manage them.

My 60 seconds are up.

Found it valuable?