The State of Hiring – Instinct & Inconsistency Hinder Key Goals of Hiring
Given that challenges presented to hiring managers in the midst of a global pandemic are relatively widespread, it begs the question: What do hiring managers actually want their organizations’ hiring process to look like?
When asked the first word that comes to mind from the phrase “good hiring process,” the two most common words offered were “structure” and “fair.”
But those descriptors are contradicted by what hiring managers reported really characterizes their organizations’ hiring processes. Consider these findings:
Roughly two-thirds (65%) of hiring managers told us they rely more on their instinct than data when deciding who to hire. This is certainly understandable— we’re often told to “go with our gut” when it comes to big decisions—but it also makes fairness more elusive. Often without realizing it, we may be inclined to select candidates who share our interests or backgrounds or who resemble what we think an employee should look like. Though certainly not our intent, relying on our intuition in making quick decisions— which is often the case, given demands on managers’ time—means we fall back on our biases. And this can result in organizations losing out on the most qualified candidate.
Furthermore, the reality is that relying on our instinct now—in a virtual setting—is even more difficult and less reliable than before. Our inability to fully pick up on and decipher a candidate’s non-verbal cues, such as body language (and, by the same token, their inability to do the same), means we simply have less information with which to make decisions. But if we don’t substitute in data—which is, after all, heavily relied upon in all other aspects of decision-making—on what basis are hiring managers really making consequential talent decisions?
Our findings show that organizations have failed to implement consistent hiring practices. This may not seem critical, but it is actually very consequential.
54 percent said hiring managers do not always align with colleagues and/or recruiters on job requirements
39 percent said candidates are not always assessed with a structured interview process
70 percent said new hires are not always onboarded effectively
In fact, 18% of organizations—fewer than 1 in 5—always perform these three steps in their hiring process. This lack of consistency can produce discrepancies in both hiring managers’ and candidates’ experiences with the hiring process, and it can lead to substantial variability in how candidates are assessed (some more rigorously than others). It seems that although organizations have adapted their hiring processes in light of the pandemic, there is still little consistency— and even less structure—in the way hiring is done.
But again, we must ask ourselves: On what basis are human resources professionals and hiring managers deciding who to assess and how to assess them? If all candidates are not assessed with the same rigor, there is considerable opportunity for uncertainty—as well as intuition and bias—to seep into hiring decisions and cost organizations the best person for the job.
Stay tuned for our next article, where we will be covering one of the major consequences of hiring managers’ reliance on instinct over data… which is undermining confidence in the hiring process.
In the meantime, schedule a complimentary consultation call to review your hiring process with one of our friendly professionals!