From the Ask Tom mailbag:

Question:
For me it depends. “Where do you want to be in five years” is probably bordering on useless, but it might be helpful combined with some other questions to find out how the candidate has met their personal career goals in the past.

Response:
Here is the problem with asking a question that does not provide useful data. The problem is the candidate’s response.

• I want to be president of the company.
• I want to be a contributing member of the team, in the exact role you are hiring for.
• I want to have your job.
• I want to retire.

Here’s the thing. I don’t know what any of these responses mean. And they don’t have anything to do with the accountabilities or the skill set of the role. So, I have to figure out what these responses mean. As the interviewer, I now have to make an interpretation. As the interviewer, as soon as I start to interpret, as soon as I begin to play amateur psychologist, I am in trouble.

Let’s see. What does it mean that the candidate wants to be president of our company in five years?

I DON’T KNOW. But the candidate said it, so I have to put it somewhere in my head, and it’s not even a data point. It’s an unverifiable statement with an interpretation. I, now, have this junk rattling around in my brain that doesn’t make any sense.

And I have other junk rattling around in there as well.

• First impressions
• Stereotypes
• The way the candidate dressed
• That the candidate was nervous
• That their resume had a time gap in it
• That the candidate only worked six months in their last job

And these are elements that I cannot help but think about. As the interviewer, I cannot help that I carry stereotypes in my head. We all do. That’s why I have to have 50-80 written questions and ask two drill down questions for every written question, so I have 150 other data points to balance off my stereotype.

As the interviewer, I have enough junk in my head, so why would I ask an idiotic question to add to it?

From the Ask Tom mailbag:

Question:
I have only been reading your blog for a couple months so bear with me for the inane question. I was curious when I read today’s post why you consider the question “Where do you want to be in 5 years?” the most idiotic question you could ask in an interview. I have been in quite a few interviews and have heard (and asked) some idiotic questions in an attempt to learn how to identify good talent and a good fit to my team so I would love to get your take on this interview question.

Response:
I have a very strong bias in the interview stage of recruiting (and I have to give Barry Shamis the credit). First, I believe that preparation is the key to gaining enough information to make a better hiring decision. But it’s not enough to gain a higher quantity of data. The quality of the data is as important.

So, what data is helpful and what data is NOT helpful, even damaging.

Helpful

• Real facts.
• Verifiable facts.
• Real, verifiable facts about past performance.
• Real, verifiable facts that demonstrate the translation of technical knowledge into applied performance (behavior).
• Real, verifiable facts that demonstrate the translation of attitude and emotion into applied performance (behavior).

Not Helpful

• Stuff that got made up.
• Stuff that got exaggerated.
• Stuff that came from a textbook, but was never actually applied in past performance (behavior).
• Conjecture.
• Opinion.
• Stuff that is not verifiable.
• Stuff that exists only in the mind of the candidate, with NO basis in reality.

So, look at this question, “Where do you want to be in five years?” Which bucket does it fall into? Helpful? Not Helpful?

Barry Shamis wrote the book. Hiring 3.0 – New Rules for the New Economy.

Why You Should Care

If you follow this blog, you know I have extreeeemely strong bias for hiring strategy. You are well aware of my insistence on 50-80 written prepared questions going into the interview. You know about the most idiotic question ever asked in an interview. (Where do you plan to be five years from now?)

Barry Shamis is responsible for all that. And now he has captured it all in his newest book – Hiring 3.0.

Don’t take my word for it, just buy it. Best single book on the planet. It beats them all, including Top Grading. Here’s the link. Hiring 3.0.

It had taken six months to make the decision to spend $65,000 on a new machine. It was replacing another older machine that was finally being retired. There had been a committee conducting research about the new on-board technology. Another team of two had been shopping between leasing arrangements and term equipment loans. The transition team was hard at work to determine how work-in-process would be diverted during the installation and burn-in period. The training department was coordinating a technician training program with the manufacturer. This equipment purchase was going to be a real game breaker.

What I was most interested in was the Project Manager hired into the company two weeks ago. The salary was about the same, $65,000. Three people were involved in the interview process, but when I looked at the documentation from those interviews, it was mostly subjective nonsense:

• I think he has a good personality and will fit in well with our culture.
• In the next five years, he wants to excel in project management. That’s what we need him for.
• Demonstrated a great attitude the during the interview.

The job description was a photocopy of a similar position with some notes scratched on the bottom. The training program consisted of shadowing another project manager for two days.

Perhaps we should create a process that takes recruiting as serious as buying a piece of equipment. We would do well to treat our people as well as we do our machines.

“You may have hired the wrong person,” I said, “but you haven’t figured out exactly what’s wrong. You have a decision to make, with three alternatives.

• Live with the situation, and continue to complain about it.
• Terminate or reassign the person to a different role.
• Redefine the role within the capability of the person you hired.

“You know, I can’t live with it,” Stella replied. “I, personally, have to fill the gap for any underperformance. And I have my own responsibilities. Every minute I steal away to cover for my supervisor is a minute away from my own tasks. I don’t see any way around it. This job really requires someone with a nine month Time Span. Our new supervisor has only demonstrated capability at around two months. I cannot take her under my wing and hold her hand.”

“What are you going to do?”

Stella’s disbelief faded to reality. “You’re right. That’s what I did during my interview, here. I tried to steer the conversation to my best qualities. I mean, I answered their questions, truthfully, but, you know, they didn’t really ask that many. They spent most of the time describing the job, what they expected and how great the company was.”

“You probably got more out of the interview than they did,” I replied. “So, what can we do different?”

“Isn’t it a little late, we already hired the wrong person.”

Stella was surprised. “Well, I don’t think he lied to me, but I guess I didn’t get what I needed from the interview.”

“Don’t feel bad. Most of the people on your interview team didn’t do any better than you. It’s a combination of things,” I consoled. “First, candidates do much more preparation than you do. They re-write their resume customized to your job posting, have others review it, spend time with headhunters who coach them on what to say, and read interview books all designed for one specific thing. To beat you in the job interview.”

“What do you mean, evidence?” Stella asked. “It’s an interview. If someone says they are up to the task, that they are interested in the challenge, that they really want the responsibility, what more can you get? I mean, I asked those hard questions.”

“Exactly what were the questions you asked,” I wanted to know. “Let’s list out those hard questions.”

“Okay,” Stella started. “I asked if he really thought he was up to the task? I explained just how difficult the job would be and asked him if he would really be interested in the challenge? I asked him why he wanted that level of responsibility?”

“So, you asked him the perfect questions, so he could lie to you?” -TF

“Your new supervisor?” I asked.

“Yes,” Stella explained. “Everyone on the interview team agreed this was the best candidate, but she’s been in the role for two months now, plenty of time for adjustment and it’s just not working out.”

“And this candidate had worked at this level before?”

“Well, not really, but she said she was ready for it. That’s why she was leaving her old job, not enough challenge in it.”

“This is a supervisor position, what’s the time span?”

“Nine months,” Stella replied.

“Tell me, what is the longest task?” I pulled out a piece of paper to make some notes.

“It’s scheduling,” she continued. “Some of our equipment is very expensive, difficult to get and difficult to move from one job to the next. It can cost us $15,000 just for the riggers to relocate some of the pieces. So we schedule our logistics out six to nine months. And when we schedule it, we stick to plan. Too expensive to do otherwise.”

“And your candidate provided evidence of nine month time span work in the past?”

“Evidence? No, but she assured us she was up to the task.”

From the Ask Tom Mailbag –

Question:
Hey Tom, I want your opinion on something…Why do the wrong people end up in management/leadership positions? What are the first three reasons that come to mind?

Response:
While it’s fun to poke at dysfunction, especially in managerial positions (just read Dilbert, my favorite), there are shining examples of high performing managers in most organizations. But there are a few stinky ones out there.

Next-in-line – Most teams will eventually lose their manager, either to a promotion, to another company or to trout fishing in Montana. In many cases, that team will end up with the next-in-line. This person may have been a competent assistant, been on the team the longest or simply showed up for work early on the wrong day. Poof – you’re a manager.

Mis-selection – Companies recruiting from the outside often make a poor hiring decision. For the most part, they have no clue about what it takes to be an effective manager. Clueless, they fumble through a stack of resumes, ask the wrong questions during interviews and end up with an empty suit. Poof – you’re a manager.

Skill-set – Many people are perfectly capable to be effective in a managerial role, but have never been trained in specific skills. Being a manager has a great deal to do with “who” you are, yet there are several leadership skills (yes, trainable skills) that must be learned and practiced. Most companies don’t have internal capabilities to teach or coach those skills. Poof – you’re a manager. Good luck.