By now those of you who know me know I have a cynical streak, and it's in that flavor of prose I will take you back to the “olden days” before human resources and testing. The days of Sherwood Forest. Let us venture back and look at Robin Hood’s Company,“ RH Merry Men.” The guys who robbed from the rich and gave to the poor.

When Robin needed to hire a Merry Man or Merry Woman, he would talk with the candidate first. Get a feel for him. Perhaps take the guy to a stream with a log spanning it’s width and in simple combat, see how the guy handled himself. Later they might go out and share some of the King’s deer and some grog. A way just to feel him out. Robin would then say his goodbyes to the candidate and go off and talk about him with his trusted Merry Men. I can imagine Robin saying to Fryer Tuck; “ What do you think Tuck? He seemed to know his way around a bow and arrow.” Tuck might have chortled back; “ Yes but would he be as steady against the King’s men?” In the end Robin would make the decision as to whether or not he’d hire the guy based on a lot of human intuition and observation. Lets skip ahead to present day.

Now, the candidate is met with a quick phone call and if she passes a few internet tests about personality, intelligence, math and reading skills, we move onto a face to face interview. A lot of times if one person does not like her during the process, she is sent packing. The idea is if, out of 4 people “Joe” doesn’t like her, we stop moving ahead. If she does not score well on a certain test, The answer is; “I’m sorry she wasn’t a fit.” What is happening is we’re wrapping ourselves up with excuses to not hire a person thereby making no one at fault if the candidate fails. The hiring manager, is protected. “It wasn’t my fault for the bad hire.” “We all liked her!” “She did excellent on her tests.” But hear this. It’s not the hiring manager’s fault. It’s whoever is above them and how they hold them accountable. What the person at the top misses is hiring a candidate once you know they technically understand the job is a totally human intuitive process. By giving up our humanness to the system we are losing some great people.  Let’s face it, If the hiring process were left to tests and decisions by committee during Britain’s Darkest Hour, they never would have picked Churchill to lead them out. I’m not saying stop the tests either. I am saying don’t make them the mitigating factor. Don’t let one person on the team stop the whole team if the others all like the candidate. Four years ago I had a great candidate who was passed over by one of my clients during his first interview. He didn’t run a food cost that the client felt he should have. Although very professional he was not as “put together” as the other candidate. I took him to another client. A smaller company who was looking for the right person. They took their time an got to know him. They didn’t even give the candidate a single test! It took two weeks and then they made him an offer. Today his restaurant is one of the top two in the market. He runs an independent and puts it to Olive Garden and Ruby Tuesday, Long Horn, Chili’s and MacGrill all day long. What of the company that did not hire him? Their restaurant isn’t even close.

If Robin Hood had tests he might have wanted to see them. He might have wanted to hear Tuck’s opinion. But in the end he would have made the decision based on what he thought. Companies need to rely on their people interviewing. Hiring Managers are going to make mistakes. Don’t beat them senseless for it and they won’t be afraid go out on a limb for the next Churchill. You will get stronger candidates. It’s really not science. It’s what one person gets when they sit down across from another and take a measure.

Run the background check though 

Talk with you soon,

Jim

See more of my views at Coromel's View: 

Link:  www.jimcoromel.wordpress.com