Tuesday, March 6, 2018

A Common Recruiting Mistake

Perhaps you heard about the college baseball coach in Texas that notified a prospect in Colorado that he wasn't welcome.  Unfortunately, we are not recruiting players from the state of Colorado. In the past, players have had trouble passing our drug test, he wrote to the high schooler.

This is an example of a very common error related to recruiting - the tendency for hiring managers to draw conclusions about an individual based on past experience with other individuals who share some common link.

In this case, the coach's failed logic is pretty easy to spot - by excluding all prospects from Colorado, he is unnecessarily limiting his prospect pool and he might possibly miss out on a future hall of famer, like Goose Gossage (from Colorado Springs) or a Cy Young Award winner, like Roy Halladay (from Arvada).

Most companies have competitors they respect and competitors they don't think as highly of. As a result, managers often have a strong bias against candidates who previously worked for one of the companies that are not as well respected. In essence, they are saying, since we perceive Company X to be a lousy company, Candidate A is probably a lousy candidate.

This is a lazy shortcut that so many managers and owners make in a variety of ways. Other examples include:

We prefer workers from a certain ethnic group rather than workers from another ethnic group. The reality is that there are hard workers as well as lazy individuals in every ethnic group.

We don't interview anyone with an aol email address. The assumption here is often that workers over 40 aren't "energetic" enough or will expect too much pay. That candidate you passed-up based on indicators they are older might be a marathon runner or yoga instructor who is highly skilled and very affordable. 

We don't hire anyone with tattoos or goofy hair colors. 40% of millennials have a tattoo. Are you sure you want to automatically eliminate that much of your prospect pool based on what is likely a faulty assumption - that a large percentage of your customers will be put off by someone with visible tattoos?

Men do this job better than women (or vice versa). Statistically, men dominate certain fields and women others. Does this mean that a dentist should automatically reject a male dental hygienist candidate or a construction contractor ignore a female carpenter applicant?  

Humans have a natural tendency to assign people to groups and to attribute skills and abilities based on group stereotypes. Since hiring managers are busy and want to be efficient in their interviewing and selection processes, it is tempting for them to screen people out based on these types of broad-stroke criteria.

Hiring managers will get much better results if they evaluate each candidate as an individual rather than a member of some arbitrary group first. The kid from Colorado may be a stoner, but he might also have never smoked marijuana in his life and go on to be a star player at another university. If that turns out to be true, the college in Texas missed him because they used faulty criteria to evaluate his potential.




No comments:

Post a Comment