Archive for August, 2011
Silly Interview Questions
Each week I like to take time to catch up on research reading. So last night I reread Anne Fisher’s article in FORTUNE/CNN Where she talks about interviewers resorting to desperate
measures in their efforts to narrow the field of candidates. It strikes me that interviewers and company’s will experiment with interview techniques too often and without understanding what they will do with the answers. Like having too many interviews or a number of personality tests.
Silly Questions
Anyway, back to the silly questions. In most
cases the interviewers were reported to be more interested in how candidates responded, identified their thought processes and seeing if they kept their cool. Some of the questions, however, are truly bizarre!
Here’s three of my favourites:
“Using a scale of 1 to 10, rate yourself on how weird you are.” Capital One (COF)
“Explain quantum electrodynamics in two minutes, starting now.” Intel (INTC)
“How many balloons would fit in this room?” PricewaterhouseCoopers
Candidates questions
What would the reaction be, I wonder, if the tables were turned and candidates started to do the same? With that in mind:
What would be the questions you might be tempted to ask an interviewer for a job?
Some INfrequently Asked Questions
Yesterday I blogged on Simon Swan’s article in the latest edition of Management Today and got quite a reaction. A whole load of people, shocked at the costs to their business, contacted me with questions and to discuss team restructures. They ranged from large businesses with a number of teams to a small company of four considering expanding to a team of just five people.
Not so boring stats
All of them were shocked to hear the answers to the “INfrequently asked questions”.
that business never asks*:
- What percentage of new hires fail within two years of appointment?
A: 40% - What % or restructured teams fail to meet objectives?
A: 42% - What % of projects are completed to time, budget and specification?
A: 28%
But it doesn’t have to be like this and I talked through my callers an eighteen minute SKYPE call when I explained how to reduce the risks of new hire and team failure…easily.
They’ve urged me to offer the same eighteen minutes to my SKYPE contacts (stephenharvarddavis) and I thought I would offer this to my blog readers and at no charge.
If you want to take me up on this then email me at Stephen@assimilating-talent.com so that we can arrange a mutually convenient time for a SKYPE call.
For the moment I’m restricting this to the first ten respondents and during the next seven days so don’t let time pass if you want to take me up on the offer
* Stats from various sources including Fortune Magazine and HBR
“How *!* Much?”
Did you see Simon Swans article in the latest edition of Management Today*? Simon talks about the importance of interviewing and quotes Harvard University research that says that new hire failure costs can amount to five times salary. I thought the costs understated and suspect that Simon’s probably taken a fixed cost of salary and direct expenses but not included the lost opportunity costs that result from a new hire failure.
At this point you probably might discount my own research as being inflated, if I included it here, so let me point to Brad Smart’s book “Topgrading” ,as evidence, where he wrote that his research into new hire failure could amount to 24 times the salary. Much of these come from lost opportunities which, depending upon position, include lost sales, projects not met and so on
I thought it interesting that Simon’s solutions to the problem was to ensure that the Resume (CV) was accurate and that the interview process robust. All good stuff. However, a crucial part of the process is the six months that a company spends integrating the individual into the new job.
* 5th August 2011
More interviews equals even better hires…right?
I’ve recently heard suggestions that the
more interviews and hoops candidates are expected to jump through…the
better the final quality of hire. Then a similar question was asked on LinkedIn and I thought I would repeat the answer in my blog.
The proposition is WRONG
Very sorry, but it’s wrong. Let me clarify: I have spent the last ten years talking to CEO’s about
hiring and integrating people into their firm faster and more
profitably. Asking a candidate to do more and more tests and interviews simply clouds the process. Two interviews, one assessment and a follow up meeting to negotiate terms is enough. In my experience having a new hire failure or poor hires has more to do
with the lack of interview experience by the interviewer, an inability of interviewer to assess candidates correctly and
poor integration by the business.
Interviewers training
Directors that interview people for a job do so about two or three times
a year. Hardly enough time to gain great expertise or to maintain that
ability. This may be a reason why businesses rely on more and more interviews and tests. However, again in
my experience, tests are only as good as the ability to understand the
results. (Too many people will fix on one statistic from a test and base their
choice on that as opposed to a rounded assessment).
One solution is to encourage interviewers to undergo some training
before undertaking important interviews. Then to have some experts on
the interview panel that can provide focussed views.
Cost of failed hire can be shedloads of money off the bottom line
Interestingly the COSTS of NEW HIRE FAILURE can be huge and my research
confirms Brad Smart’s research that the cost of failure can range from
10 – 24 times salary.
So if you’re hiring at a salary of $45,000, choose a multiple and see how much a new hire failure could cost your business!
Links:
Film passes 2000 barrier
The film on Sales and Marketing questions broke the 2000 views barrier this weekend.
The series on asking and answering interviewing questions has been a great success and in particular those on sales.
In total my YouTube channel has has over 9000 views and you can access all the films HERE
So for those that missed “Sales and Marketing Interview Questions” here’s another chance and more films are being planned
Sales and Marketing interview questions
www.stephenharvarddavis.com
Just adjust the angle of the golf club
In the past few days I’ve heard of a sales team that’s finding things difficult after a restructure. The restructure slimmed the team, redistributed clients and rationalised the workload but they seem to be failing.
HOW *!* MUCH
Actually, that’s not unusual because my research and other statistics show that 42% of all restructured teams fail to deliver the anticipated results. The problem for the company is the cost in lost opportunities. Brad Smart in his book Topgrading estimated that failed teams cost between 8 and 24 times the salary.
Change needed for success can be very small
The change required to move from failure to success is, in my opinion, very small and a slight adjustment in in team actions could well change things around. But then that’s so often the case. As most of the team play golf they will understand that a slight adjustment in club face can be the difference to a great round and playing like a crab! Perhaps this clip of Tony Robbins explaining why he plays golf, badly, might help!
Tony Robbins – Tiny Changes Mean Huge Results
Why is “Out of sight defintely out of mind”?
Ten days ago I was talking to Carl, a good friend of mine, who’s “Ticked off” with the co-operation he’s getting from superiors and colleagues. Now those very people may have to work that bit harder!
A trail-blazing project
Carl, together with his management team and staff of two hundred, have spent the past year leading a trailblazing project that saves huge amounts of money and delivers enhanced service to the local community. People have said to him “What would we do without you?” and “What you’ve achieved is brilliant”. To achieve these plaudits he’s had to work long hours, hiring a large team and creating process, systems and culture and often without a “model” to follow.
As is usual there has been criticism from other areas of the business that feels overshadowed and exposed. As a result Carl’s team have felt pressured and unappreciated by the very people they are helping to do a better job.
A well earned holiday
A few weeks ago he went on holiday with various senior people and colleagues promising to deliver work whilst he was away ringing in his ears
…was it done when he got back?…daft question…because out of sight was definitely out of mind!
The result is that he’s even more tired than he was before his holiday. Now he’s updated his CV (Resume), bought a new interview suit and is looking for a job and has some interviews even before he’s formally applied for a position. I wonder how the people who’ve said “What would we do without you” will cope when he’s gone!
Cost of replacement and restructure…could be huge!
The peril of Ignoring old customs & culture
On Sunday I was invited to brunch by some friends. A real treat, but the topic of conversation was depressing. Two of our party, of six, announced that they were changing jobs. Not because they wanted to but because one felt unappreciated, the other tired of a failing “new hire manager”.
Performance review.
The first, an exceptionally clever person, had just had a performance review where his “new boss” had reduced his performance grade for willingness to undertake overtime and timekeeping because he said that he “Didn’t believe in awards at highest grade…”. The previous year the employee a highest grade for willingness to work overtime at short notice. The reduction would mean a change in salary expectation.
Tired of inefficient management
The second friend, the companies highest producing salesperson, recounted various “New hire ” management decisions that had affected how people were able to perform, ignored previous culture and customs and this was affecting team morale. As a result he was deciding to leave.
I’m not against change but find it difficult to understand when new managers try to create an impression without considering the consequences. Ignoring old customs and culture does no-one any favours. In the end one company might lose an enthusiastic and hard working employee and the other a high performing salesperson.