In the last few months we’ve had to do major hiring and so several interviews have been conducted. We did a fair bit of experimentation and gave opportunities to all levels of persons to conduct interviews. We found several interesting things. Not only about the candidates, but also about the interviewers. And several traits were consistent across the interviewers, barring one or two exceptions.
The candidates themselves were typically bright young men and women. In most cases when we found them unsuitable, it was not a reflection on the candidates but more on the institutes where they had graduated. The teaching seemed to have focused on theory and examinations and the level of practical knowledge, the ability of doing as opposed to the ability of knowing seemed to be lacking. The ones who made the cut were typically those who had taken the effort of exploring on their own. They were the ones who had actually taken up projects, done them, understood the process and had the ability to apply it to real life.
The more interesting aspect was the interviewers themselves. In almost all cases, they were asking questions that they knew. And had a standard answer they expected. All of this was based on their knowledge and years of experience. They seemed to forget that they needed to measure the candidates based on their current knowledge. A candidate who was lucky at having some ideas in the areas questioned, and gave the expected answers got to the next round. Others were given a “NTY” short for a “No, Thank You”.
On further looking into the behavior pattern, we realized that it seemed like a similar pattern was being followed in almost all assessments. Whether its Vivas in schools and colleges or job interviews or professional exams. The next step was to speak with friends in other countries, and see what the patterns there were.
We had a pleasant surprise. The only 2 countries about which we could gather credible data was the UK and the US. And in both places, this did not seem to be the pattern. Here, the assessor typically took the trouble of finding out what all the candidate knew. And then try and get as much information about those areas. Thus assessing the candidates abilities in an area he is very comfortable with. This gives a very good insight into not only the capabilities of the candidates but also their potential.
We obviously need to change our methodology. But that cannot happen overnight. I guess it’s a slow and evolving process and will happen when enough of us realize that we are missing some amazing talent and hiring mediocrity because of their ability to answer standard questions.
As a first step, in addition to sensitizing people to the issues we are facing and our errors and omissions, we have put in a system where the interviewer has to fill out a form about areas that the candidate knows. In other words they are forced to find out as much as they can about the candidate, since their report reflects their ability. Hopefully, our stars will be able to detect and hire Brighter Stars.
The candidates themselves were typically bright young men and women. In most cases when we found them unsuitable, it was not a reflection on the candidates but more on the institutes where they had graduated. The teaching seemed to have focused on theory and examinations and the level of practical knowledge, the ability of doing as opposed to the ability of knowing seemed to be lacking. The ones who made the cut were typically those who had taken the effort of exploring on their own. They were the ones who had actually taken up projects, done them, understood the process and had the ability to apply it to real life.
The more interesting aspect was the interviewers themselves. In almost all cases, they were asking questions that they knew. And had a standard answer they expected. All of this was based on their knowledge and years of experience. They seemed to forget that they needed to measure the candidates based on their current knowledge. A candidate who was lucky at having some ideas in the areas questioned, and gave the expected answers got to the next round. Others were given a “NTY” short for a “No, Thank You”.
On further looking into the behavior pattern, we realized that it seemed like a similar pattern was being followed in almost all assessments. Whether its Vivas in schools and colleges or job interviews or professional exams. The next step was to speak with friends in other countries, and see what the patterns there were.
We had a pleasant surprise. The only 2 countries about which we could gather credible data was the UK and the US. And in both places, this did not seem to be the pattern. Here, the assessor typically took the trouble of finding out what all the candidate knew. And then try and get as much information about those areas. Thus assessing the candidates abilities in an area he is very comfortable with. This gives a very good insight into not only the capabilities of the candidates but also their potential.
We obviously need to change our methodology. But that cannot happen overnight. I guess it’s a slow and evolving process and will happen when enough of us realize that we are missing some amazing talent and hiring mediocrity because of their ability to answer standard questions.
As a first step, in addition to sensitizing people to the issues we are facing and our errors and omissions, we have put in a system where the interviewer has to fill out a form about areas that the candidate knows. In other words they are forced to find out as much as they can about the candidate, since their report reflects their ability. Hopefully, our stars will be able to detect and hire Brighter Stars.
No comments:
Post a Comment