“But, I am not the Hiring Manager. I don’t want to undercut the authority of the other people on the team,” Rene explained.

“I didn’t ask you undercut authority. I asked how you, as a senior manager in the company could bring value to this hiring process, even if you were only asked to be an observer. You observed an ineffective process. In what way could you have improved it?”

“I guess I could have insisted on a Role Description,” Rene replied.

“Exactly, as a member of the hiring team, even an observer, you can insist that a process be followed. How could you possibly be of assistance in a hiring process without an up-to-date Role Description?”

“Okay,” Rene hesitated, “but I am not the Hiring Manager driving this process. I am not even a member of this department.”

“Look, the hiring team thought enough of you to ask for your participation. I am often in the same boat, as an outsider. I have no authority inside the company, but I get invited to help. The best help you can provide is to insist in a defined process and that elements, like writing Role Descriptions, don’t get shortcut.”

“I know you were asked to sit in on the hiring decision, and that you felt you were just an observer in this process, but you still feel responsible for what may turn out to be a poor hiring decision. What could you have done differently?”

Rene searched the corner of the room for an answer. “By the time we got into the interview room, I felt powerless to step in. I was not the prime interviewer, not the Hiring Manager.”

“You are right,” I insisted. “Your role, as an observer could have been much more powerful, much more effective in this process, but only if you had started earlier. Where do you think you should have dug in?”

“Well, I mean, I don’t even think they had a Role Description. How could I have helped, if they didn’t even do the basic groundwork?”

“Indeed,” I smiled. “How could you have helped? What groundwork could you have insisted on? Don’t think that just because you are an observer, you can’t have influence on the quality of this process. What groundwork could you have insisted on?”

Rene was frustrated. “I was asked to sit in on this hiring committee,” she began. “I am not the Hiring Manager, not even the Manager-Once-Removed, but I was asked to be a member of the Hiring Team. We sit with the first candidate, asking questions for about ten minutes, then the Hiring Manager spends 25 minutes talking about what a great company this is.”

“And?” I prompted.

“And the candidate walked out, the Hiring Manager turned to me, said he kind of liked the guy, and wanted to know what I think. I don’t know what to think.”

“You didn’t ask any questions during the interview?”

“No,” Rene replied, gathering her thoughts. “I was just asked to sit in on the decision. I thought I was playing the role of the observer.”

“And what do you think will happen?”

“I think we are going to hire this candidate and we don’t know anything about him.”

“Yet, even though you were the observer, you feel responsible for what may turn out to be a poor hiring decision?”

“Yes!” she responded, shaking her head.

“What could you have done differently, as an observer?”

From the Ask Tom Mailbag:

Question:
In the hiring process, if I am in a Stratum V role, engaged in hiring a Stratum IV VP, that makes me the hiring manager. Since I am at the top of the food chain in our company, who is the Manager Once Removed? Do I hire a consultant or a head hunter to help me.

Response:
Heavens no. With all due respect to the consulting community, most come to the table with limited insight into your company. They don’t know you, your limitations, your blind spots, your soft spots, your focus.

This is a shameless plug for peer groups, my favorite is an organization called Vistage. Self-described, a peer group consists of a group (of peers) with similar roles, who meet on a regular basis to kick the can around. It is those other people who sit around the table, who can be valuable in your hiring process for Executive Managers. Your peers, in their own organization, have similar accountabilities, likely, similar capability to you, and yet, do not wear your blinders. This outside objectivity may provide the critical insight, to bring value to the decision you are about to make in the hiring process.

Make no mistake, this is still your decision. You are the one who has to live with it.

From the Ask Tom Mailbag:

Question:
When you talk about the role of the Manager Once Removed, in the hiring process, am I clear that the MOR conducts all of the candidate screening, initial interviews and then hands over a slate of candidates to the Hiring Manager?

Manager Once Removed (MOR)
——————————————-
Hiring Manager
——————————————-
Open Position

Response:
No. That would be an abdication of one of the primary responsibilities of the MOR to the Hiring Manager. Don’t think of these steps in the hiring process as sterile vacuum compartments to be handed off from the MOR to the Hiring Manager. If the Hiring Manager does a poor job of hiring, I hold the MOR accountable. Once the MOR understands this, real conversations begin.

The conversation starts with the observation (by either the Hiring Manager or the MOR) that we may need to add a team member. This may result from a termination, vacancy or a new position created by work volume or other circumstance. Together, they will hash out whether another person is really needed, whether there is budget and any other details surrounding the decision. They will work together to define the role description, Key Result Areas, critical role requirements and other elements related to team fit and company culture. This is a rich managerial conversation, aligned with the mandate for the Manager Once Removed to bring value to the Hiring Manager’s decision.

With this foundation, they will continue to work together, creating written interview questions and a decision matrix to compare candidates. While the hiring decision rests with the Hiring Manager, I hold the MOR accountable if a poor decision is made.

I know this sounds like work. Well, it is. This is managerial work.

We have been using a Team approach to hiring,” Byron floated. “What do you think of having Team interviews?”

“How do you find that helpful?” I asked.

“Sometimes a single interview might miss something important. If there is another Hiring Team member in the room, they might catch it,” Byron replied.

“I am all for Interview Teams. But I don’t want to gang up on candidates. Here is the way I like to use Teams.

“Let’s say we put three people on the Interview Team. We have a meeting to decide on what areas we intend to cover during the interview. Some areas will overlap and that’s fine. These will be separate interviews and I would like to know if the candidate tells the same story to similar questions.

“And some of the areas will be different, depending on the Interview Team member. They have different areas of expertise and follow different lines of questions.

“But the most significant reason to work with an Interview Team is to put together the list of 50-60 questions that create the base line for the interview.”

Byron looked a little surprised. We had talked about this number of questions before, but I couldn’t tell if he was a believer. “Fifty or sixty prepared questions?”

“Yes, and that’s only the beginning.”

We are gathering the next group (and last group in 2011) for our online program Hiring Talent, which kicks off September 19, 2011. As the economy (slowly) recovers, your next hires are critical. This is not a time to be casual about the hiring process. Mistakes are too expensive and margins are too thin.

Purpose of this program – to train managers and HR specialists in the discipline of conducting more effective interviews in the context of a managed recruiting process.

How long is the program? This program will take eight weeks.

How do people participate in the program? This is an online program conducted by Tom Foster. Participants will be responsible for online assignments and participate in online facilitated discussion groups with other participants. This online platform is highly interactive. Participants will interact with Tom Foster and other participants as they work through this program.

Next program starts September 19, 2011. Pre-register Now.

Who should participate? This program is designed for Stratum III and Stratum IV managers and HR managers who play active roles in the recruiting process for their organizations.

What is the cost? The program investment is $699 per participant.

When is the program scheduled? Pre-registration is now open. The program is scheduled to kick-off September 19, 2011.

How much time is required to participate in this program? Participants should reserve approximately 2 hours per week. This program is designed so participants can complete their assignments on their own schedule anytime during each week’s assignment period.

Pre-register Now.

September 19, 2011

• Orientation

Week One – Role Descriptions – It’s All About the Work

• What we are up against
• Specific challenges in the process
• Problems in the process
• Defining the overall process
• Introduction to the Role Description
• Organizing the Role Description
• Defining Tasks
• Defining Goals
• Identifying Time Span

Week Two

• Publish and critique role descriptions

Week Three – Interviewing for Future Behavior

• Creating effective interview questions
• General characteristics of effective questions
• How to develop effective questions
• How to interview for attitudes and non-behavioral elements
• How to interview for Time Span
• Assignment – Create a battery of interview questions for the specific role description

Week Four

• Publish and critique battery of interview questions

Week Five – Conducting the Interview

• Organizing the interview process
• Taking Notes during the process
• Telephone Screening
• Conducting the telephone interview
• Conducting the face-to-face interview
• Working with an interview team
• Compiling the interview data into a Decision Matrix
• Background Checks, Reference Checks
• Behavioral Assessments
• Drug Testing
• Assignment – Conduct a face-to-face interview

Week Six

• Publish and critique results of interview process

Week Seven – Using Profile Assessments

• Using Profile Assessments

Week Eight

• Publish and critique results from Profile Assessments

Registration
Pre-registration is now open for this program. No payment is due at this time.

Note –
This program concludes prior to the Thanksgiving holiday (USA) and will be the last Hiring Talent Program offered in 2011.

“What’s the risk?” I asked. “What if you promote Ryan to this new managerial role and it turns out to be the wrong decision?”

Cheryl hesitated. “Not good. It’s never good when you put someone in a role and they don’t work out.”

“And who will I hold accountable if it doesn’t work out?”

Cheryl suddenly realized that, as the manager, she would be in the hotseat, not Ryan. “When you think it through like that,” she started, “I guess it would be me.”

I nodded, “Yes, so how could you make this decision on more than a feeling? Because I WILL hold you accountable.”

“Well, if you are going to hold ME accountable for his success or failure, I am not so sure.”

“In what way can we make certain that this is the right decision?” I insisted.

“Ryan is stepping up,” Cheryl explained. “He has been a supervisor here, four years, now. We would like to promote him to a manager role, but want to make sure we aren’t making a mistake.”

“What’s he doing, now?” I asked.

“Shipping supervisor. It used to be a no-brainer, but logistics has gotten more complicated, and we implemented a bar code system. He managed to keep up with all the changes. He has a crew of three people, picking, packing and shipping. Saved us some heavy budget, when he discovered a vendor program that allowed us to consolidate some of our freight. We are thinking about putting him in charge of the entire warehouse. As a manager, he would be in charge of maintaining all our inventory systems, cycle counts, spotting stock-outs. It’s a much bigger role.”

“But you still have your doubts?”

Cheryl moved her head side to side, “Yes, but the more I talk about it, the more I think I have made my decision.”

“Made your decision, based on what?” I pressed.

“Well, he has done a good job in his current role. I just have this feeling,” she replied.

“Feelings are nice, like good intentions. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. How can you be more certain that you are right?”

“I don’t know. I guess I will just have to put him in the job, take my chances. Have to wait and see.”