Martha was complaining about the performance of a new hire. After four weeks on the job, the budding new supervisor was showing signs of stress.

I asked, at what point in the hiring interview did she feel this person was the right candidate? Martha had been positive from the first few moments. “I felt an immediate chemistry with the candidate, I don’t know how I could have been so wrong.”

The biggest mistake by the hiring manager is making the decision too quickly in the recruiting process. Why is this emotional (chemistry) decision made so quickly? Two reasons.

1. The hiring manager has not created a position profile detailing the knowledge, skills and abilities for a successful hire.

2. The hiring manager has not created a list of 60 questions designed to collect data from the candidate related to the position profile.

In the vacuum created by this lack of preparation, the hiring manager has little on which to base the decision, other than chemistry. Chemistry decisions are made within a couple of minutes without the need for facts and we often make a poor choice in the process. -TF

The mission statement was clear, “We are the employer of choice!” But, when Anthony looked around at the company’s talent pool, that statement rang hollow. Turnover was running 68% per year with exit interviews pointing to better wages at another company. Anthony had tried paying more, yet attracted no higher quality worker than he had now. Training times were longer, waste and scrap was higher and throughput was at an all time low.

We changed the program. I told Anthony if he wanted to be the employer of choice, he had to start by choosing better. Choosing better meant turning away more of the applicant pool. We implemented three different skills tests. Two of the tests involved the operation of some basic equipment and one test was a paper and pencil test on some basic knowledge specific to the company’s manufacturing.

We raised the starting wage by $1 per hour. Any current employee below the new wage who could pass the skills test was also raised.

Of the 23 applicants the following week, Anthony would have made job offers to 18 of them. He had always made more offers than he had openings because he depended on a “no show” factor. In this new program, only nine passed the skills test. Anthony made offers to seven of those. All seven reported to work. This was the beginning.

To become the employer of choice, your company has to become a choosier employer. -TF

Question:
You talk about creating a system for recruiting that would rival our equipment procurement system. Where do we start?

Response:
Think about that machine your company just purchased. If the price was north of $50,000, a bunch of people spent a lot of time looking at this machine in many different ways. Here is where it all started.

One, two or three people sat down and did a needs assessment. In that needs assessment, they asked some very fundamental questions.

• What do we need this machine to do for us?
• Is there another way, or another machine that would do a better job?
• At the end of the week, how much production do we need from this machine?
• What are the quality standards that we need from this machine?
• How will this machine interface with our current work flow?
• What kind of support will this machine require to sustain the productivity we need from it?
• What other customers like us are currently using this machine?
• How is this machine performing for them?
• If we grow, what capacity will this machine need, in reserve, to accommodate our growth?

Think about these questions. Replace the word “machine” with the word “person.” Think about the job description you are writing. This is where you start. -TF

“In the area of behavior modification, the most, perhaps only, effective means are psychotropic drugs and frontal lobotomies, which may still be legal in some places in New York,” says Ed Ryan.

There are so many round people in square roles. So get out of the behavior modification business and get into the talent selection business.

The most effective managers are not those who are expert in motivation, or coaching, or process improvement. The most effective managers are those that are expert at defining roles and selecting the right people to fill those roles.

Look at your team. How long have you been trying to modify behavior? Any wonder why this is driving you nuts. Stop it. Get better at selecting talent, then go build your team. -TF

Ralph was amazed when he looked at the overtime. Seventy percent of the employees were working 55 hours a week plus. “We gotta find some more people.”

“So, why don’t you find some more people,” I asked.

“We have tried, but all of our supervisors complain that they don’t have time to read resumes much less conduct interviews. And you should see some of the ragtags they did hire last week. We just don’t know what to do.”

Most companies kick the job of selection and recruiting too low in the org chart. Enter the role of the Manager-Once-Removed (MOR). The MOR is the Manager one level above the supervisor, and is the missing link in most selection processes. Ralph’s complaint about the supervisor is actually the truth. Most supervisors ARE too busy and, for the most part, are not trained to conduct effective interviews.

One level up, the Manager Once Removed (MOR) has more perspective, can make better judgments and is more likely to be trained at interviewing. While the supervisor is cracking the whip on the production floor, the MOR should be planning, forecasting and recruiting. Selection is one of the highest and best uses of time for the Manager Once Removed.

Take a look at your hiring process. Do you have the right people reviewing and selecting talent? -TF

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 on the new on-board technology. Access all the excitement effortlessly with www.UFABET.com ลิ้งเข้าระบบ24 เข้าอย่างง่ายๆ. 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 last Project Manager that had been hired into the company. The salary was about the same, $65,000. Three people had been involved in the interview process, but when I looked at the documentation from those interviews, it was mostly subjective statements:

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. So there is no wonder that the new Project Manager was not going to be a real game breaker.

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. -TF