Recruiting Tips from a non-HR person | Part 2

June, 2024

The end-to-end interview process should be treated and offered as an EXPERIENCE for the candidates. It should NOT constitute a recruiting TO-DO list action whereby we simply have to go through the drill of finding the most suitable candidate. We should be offering a 'wow' experience, one that the candidates can learn from and talk about.

Beyond having a new hire who's already been super impressed with his/her experience so far, the interview process should also be something worth talking about for the rejected candidates. A memorable process helps spreads positive word-of-mouth and ultimately boosts employer branding. It's always a great idea to have someone leave an interview feeling good if not about the result of the interview itself but about the company and its processes.

​

As I now sit on the 'other side of the fence', I am the OWNER of this process for my company and I owe it to all the people who take the time to come to us for an interview to go through a respectful and insightful process. It is my duty to offer them a valuable and memorable experience.

​

So first things first.

​

THE HR 'SACRED SLA'

Before ANYTHING else, HR should adopt a SACRED SLA regarding the response time towards external interactions. As I wrote in my PART I article, I personally experienced 3 months of complete and utter radio silence following a very positive first interview round. I have sworn since that this will NEVER happen on my watch. 

The SACRED SLA secures that HR replies to ANY incoming request within 2 business days, be it a CV submission, a progress update enquiry, a question about openings etc…WHATEVER the request, HR should reply NO LATER than 2 business days. I repeat...no later than 2 business days. Even if this reply is "We have received your mail. We have no current update because we are still in the process of reviewing all candidates. Rest assured that we will be getting back to your shortly with more updates". No ghosting. No radio silence. 

​

Why not take a step further? Why not send a proactive update to a candidate-in-waiting if your process is being delayed. "George, you haven't heard from us recently because our process is taking a bit longer than we expected. Your candidacy is very important to us etc etc".

​

As part of this SLA we need should NOT make our email responses look and feel like machine-automated responses. Even if you do in fact set up automated responses, write them in such a way so that they feel as if they are not automated. Add a name (Notice the 'George' in the above example), a personal signature, a lighter tone in the message as if someone actually wrote it there and then. Send a smiley emoji. Wish them good luck in all their endeavours going forward. Make the sender feel that their presence is ACKNOWLEDGED and RESPECTED and that they are not just a recipient of an automated reply.

​

Now, back to the actual interview process.

​

​--------------------------------------------------------

​​DOCUMENT YOUR RECRUITMENT PROCESS

​

All companies no doubt have some form of process for hiring but what I am going to suggest here is go and actually CREATE & DOCUMENT YOUR RECRUITMENT PROCESS. (And guess what...Below I have the process that you can adopt! You can thank me later 😎😉)

​

Present it in to all stakeholders and get everyone on board. Make it official. Make it simple. Make it clear and make sure that it's used for all recruiting cases. It might have to be 'enforced' at first, but trust me...it then becomes default practice.

​

Here is what you need to pre-define:

​

1. 🪜INTERVIEW STAGES: Define how many interviews stages you will adopt as the company policy. This might differ according to the seniority of the position at hand (e.g. more senior roles might need a +1 final interview with the General Manager). Don't leave this matter unattended, playing it by ear. If in special cases you feel you need MORE or even in some cases LESS interviews, then fine, adjust the process but have a given framework beforehand.

​

2. 📝INTEGRATION OF ROLE PLAYING / CASE SUDY: What I STRONGLY suggest is that for EVERY ROLE, the second stage of interviews (for those who successfully pass the first), consists of a 'test' in the form of a role playing exercise for sales roles, a business case for financial roles, a case study for product roles etc. This has proven very eye-opening. You can actuallt test a candidate's knowledge and/or experience in practice. You can verify their presentation skills, their analytic thinking, their negotiation skills. It's a validation of what they tell you they are good at. Many people can bullshit their way through an interview, but they can get caught out at this stage. You can ChatGPT the PowerPoint slides, but you still need to be capable of presenting the slides Co-Pilot produced for you and and you still need to be ables to answer your audience's questions!!

​

3. 🧑🤝🧑WHO ARE THE INTERVIEWERS @ EACH STAGE: It is vital to pre-define who are the interviewers at each stage, not by name but by role. For example,

​

➡️ Stage 1

Interview #1: HR and Hiring Manager

Interview #2: Stakeholder (separately)

​

➡️ Stage 2:

Role Playing: Role Player + 2 Observers OR Case Study: Hiring Manager + Head of Department

​

Interview #3: Head of Department

​

You can also prescribe the MAXIMUM # of interviewers to be allowed at any 1 interview phase. (I mention this because I once had 4 interviewers sitting across the table from me. It felt me like an interrogation rather than a business interview.)

​

3. 👑DECISION MAKING POWER: Define the ONE individual that has the final and absolute decision making power.

For example, let's say this person is the HIRING MANAGER. It is necessary to have defined this BEFOREHAND so that in situations where there might be a strong opinion from all those involved in the process that is DIFFERENT to the decision maker, the process has outlined that despite this strong opposition, the HIRING MANAGER can go against the tide and make a contradicting final decision. If pre-defined, it should also be recognised that the final decision maker is also accountable for a potential contraversial hiring decision.

​

I believe that the final decision making holder should be the Hiring manager. Of course, the CEO/GM/MD can have OVERRIDING rights to contradict the final decision of the decision maker but this should be under extremely rare circumstances.

​

4. 💡OPTIONAL IDEA: Introduce a 'Stakeholder' interview in the form of a short chit chat rather than a hard core interview, aiming to get a 'second opinion' or a 'third eye' from someone who closely collaborates with the department that the canidate is interviewing for. This person offers an opinion and recommendation but does not have veto power.

​

Here is a graphical depiction of the above:

​