Career Development Partners » Interviewing

Don’t Be This Guy

admin — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 14:43:19 +0000

Part serious, part humorous, these hiring manager war stories will help you avoid both common and comical mistakes known to trip up job seekers.

Being on the frontlines of the employment scene, recruiters have heard every story in the book – in fact they wrote the book – on candidate faux pas. Don’t commit these common and often comical errors (shared with our recruiters by employers) when searching for your next position!

When asked what the candidate saw himself doing in 2-3 years, he said, “running my own business.” Bad idea for employers hunting for stable help.
Said he was so well-qualified that if he didn’t get the job, it would prove that the company’s management was incompetent.
Her shirt was all wrinkled.
His shoes weren’t polished.
Candidate kept giggling through serious interview.
He was wearing a sweater instead of a jacket.
Said if he were hired, he would demonstrate his loyalty by having the corporate logo tattooed on his forearm.
He wasn’t wearing a tie.
Asked to see interviewer’s resume to see if the personnel executive was qualified to judge the candidate.
She was wearing sneakers.
Brought her large dog to the interview.
He was more nervous than is the norm on the interview.
He wasn’t sitting straight up. He slouched.
He had an attitude from the moment he walked in.
He refused to fill out an application.
He wasn’t articulate.
He said he was going to retire in 5 years.
When I asked him about his hobbies, he stood up and started tap dancing around my office.
She said, “If I never see another help desk again, that would be fine with me.” Fine, except she was applying for a Tech Support position!
He said negative things about his former boss and employer.
He said he had left a previous job for more money.
Balding candidate abruptly excused himself and returned to the office a few minutes later, wearing a hairpiece.
He frowned when I talked about working overtime.
He looked away when giving me his answers. I thought he might be lying.
He had experience on his resume that he couldn’t back up.
When I asked questions about a particular work experience, he couldn’t answer. I wondered what other information on his resume wasn’t true.
Candidate wouldn’t get out of the chair until I would hire him. I had to call the police.
He was more interested in what he wanted to do, than in what I needed done.
He went from “A+” after looking at his resume to “B+” after the interview, due to his low energy levels and lack of enthusiasm.
Applicant challenged interviewer to arm wrestle.
He kept saying he ONLY did this and ONLY did that, which sounds negative. I HAVE done this and HAVE done that sounds positive.
He was 10 minutes late for the interview.
Candidate chewed bubble gum and constantly blew bubbles.
He rambled and didn’t answer the questions. (Answer questions in 30 seconds or less, or at least stay focused on your interviewer’s topic).
Without saying a word, the candidate stood up and walked out during the middle of the interview.
Candidate stretched out on the floor to fill out the job application.
She said she was available because a Headhunter called her.
She brought up salary and benefits.
He asked for $2,000 more than I could pay.
Announced she hadn’t had lunch and proceeded to eat a hamburger and french fries in the interviewer’s office.
He won’t fit in; he was too quiet and this is a team environment.
She seemed depressed.
He wasn’t upbeat.
Candidate interrupted to phone his therapist for advice on answering specific interview questions.
She smoked during the interview.
Man wore jogging suit to interview for a position as financial vice president.
Candidate wore a T-shirt to interview; when asked about it he said it was a dress-up T-shirt because it had a pocket in it.
Called university to verify degree and was informed that seemingly fantastic candidate had 15 credits. “You mean toward his MA?” I asked. The answer was no – a total of 15 credits.
She wore a Walkman and said she could listen to me and the music at the same time.
The candidate had a degree from a university in North Carolina. I tried to look up the university in a directory but couldn’t find it. I called the candidate and asked him to please get me the phone number. Two days later he called and said he couldn’t find the number and he didn’t remember what city the university is in.
Reference informed me that the candidate was management material and extremely talented. Two years later, by accident, I discovered the company owner was the candidate’s father-in-law.
Candidate had a little pinball game and challenged me to play with him.

These anecdotes are straight from the hiring managers’ mouths, as funny as some may seem. In all seriousness, work with your recruiter to polish your interviewing skills well ahead of time, so no slip up – no matter how big or small – will stand in the way of landing your dream job.

Initial Interviews Hiring is a Risk

admin — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 05:48:17 +0000

Hiring people is a risk. There is always a possibility that a manager will make a mistake. Too many companies and managers hire out of FEAR, rather than out of VISION. Several years ago the Dallas Cowboys lost a playoff game to the San Francisco 49ers by approaching the whole game tentatively and cautiously. They were not willing to take a risk, especially when they were ahead. They were more afraid of losing than motivated by the vision of winning.

We often see hiring done in the same way. Candidates are too often chosen because they are safer bets. They are paraded around and interviewed by scores of people, even committees, in order to get everyone’s approval. This approach is less effective in selecting the best candidate than in spreading the risk around, so that everyone is “covered” if it doesn’t work out. Interviewing can literally become a popularity contest, eventually put to a vote.

So often, finding a good candidate is mentally tough to do because of distaste for a long, drawn out interviewing process. We do not interview and hire often enough to really get good at it. The mental hurdle of having to set aside the time and effort drags us down. Although interviewing and hiring are two of the most important functions of a manager, they are risky. They have no immediate return on investment and are time consuming!

Make the Process Easier
There are, however, ways of making the process easier. The first is to keep initial interviews simple. So often we talk to managers who feel they have to devote days to initial interviewing. They find themselves exhausted at the end of the process because they do most of the talking: Telling the candidates about the job, the company, and whatever else comes up in an unstructured conversation.

Positive criteria for the position and candidate need to be established before interviewing begins. We recommend an initial structured interview lasting no more than one half hour. By structured we mean a prepared list of questions that are asked of each cndidate. The interviewer should record their answers, so they can be compared. The purpose of the initial interview is to assess the candidate’s skills, experience and ability to do the job. Second, a personality check can be made to assess the candidate’s ability to fit in. It’s that simple.

One Half-Hour
An employer does not have to sell the candidate on the job and his company or make a total assessment of the candidate. He is seeking only to answer a few questions about the candidate’s ability to do the job. He should inform the candidate that he is only going to be interviewed for half an hour, and, if there is interest, there will be other interviews to answer the questions of both parties. This way there are no other expectations about the length or the purpose of the initial interview. The process is clear from the start.

An interviewer has no obligation to even fill the half hour. If he comes to the conclusion in the first five minutes that the candidate is not a contender for the job, he should inform the candidate and end the interview. A candidate will appreciate that his time wasn’t wasted. Likewise, if in the first few minutes of the initial interview, the interviewer concludes the candidate should be asked back and pursued, he can inform the candidate that he will be asked back, give him literature on the company, and the interview can end.

The End
At the end of each initial interview, the interviewer should take two or three minutes to note his initial impressions of the candidate. Upon completion of initial interviews, the interviewer can begin to compare and rank the candidates. Candidates who are nearly equal should be invited back with the top candidates. At least 4 or 5 candidates should be invited back. Limiting it to too few runs the risk of the top one or two candidates eliminating themselves, or being eliminated, and having no one left to consider.

Once initial interviews are concluded, in-depth second, third, and even fourth interviews can be scheduled. Following these guidelines will make the interviewing process more productive.

Tony Beshara is owner and president of Babich & Associates. Beshara has been in business since 1973, and he alone averages $2.5 – $4 million per year in billings. If you have any questions about this article, please call (214) 823-9999.

Good Interviewers vs. Good Performers

admin — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 05:47:43 +0000

Marshall McLuhan, in his revolutionary work, The Medium Is the Message, cited that we often look at the manner in which a product is presented to us rather than at the benefits of the product itself. Interviewing to find a good employee is susceptible to the same phenomenon. We experience it all the time: THE BEST INTERVIEWEE GETS THE JOB and the best performer, the person that could do the job best, doesn’t. This is one issue of which we like to WARN EMPLOYERS. The candidate is not the best performer just because he or she interviews the best. Some candidates are exceptional at GETTING a job, but lousy at KEEPING a job. We should be mindful of this every time we interview and then force ourselves to look at previous performances of our candidates rather than HOW they interview.

Hiring is one of the most emotionally stressful things we do. Based on whom we hire, our ego, professionalism, authority, and management status are evaluated by others. Let’s face it; hiring is a distressful, uneasy thing to do. No matter how good we think we are at it, hiring is still a personal and professional risk. Few of us are ever really comfortable with hiring and probably never will be.

The Why
Because hiring is stressful, we often make it to be what it isn’t. Often the interviewing process becomes totally unrelated to the function of the position for which we are hiring. The criterion with which we start to fill a position is far removed from that necessary to measure the candidate’s ability to successfully function in the job. Interviewing becomes a beauty contest, measuring who can interview and sell themselves the best, rather than a system of techniques to discover who can function best in the job. We become so obsessed with correctly interviewing that we lose sight of the whole reason we are interviewing. The MEDIUM of the interview becomes the MESSAGE of hiring a good employee.

The How
To keep from hiring the best interviewer instead of the best candidate for your job, follow a few simple rules.

First, recognize that this phenomenon occurs. Recognize that the process of interviewing can become a staged affair where we look for the best performer at interviewing. The result of this is that the interviewing process becomes so far removed from the real issues of assessing the right skills of a candidate, that we end up looking for people.

Second, draw up a realistic, objective list of requirements based on your needs, duties and responsibilities. Start with what the function is now, and proceed through to extra things you’d like if you could get them. It is important to separate the necessities in the function from the extras desired in objective, quantifiable terms. Just because a person has been a controller for 10 years doesn’t mean he or she can do the job twice as well as someone who has 5 years of experience as a controller.

Third, lay out a plan of interviewing. Include in your plan the people who will be involved, the exact number of interviews the hiring manager will do, and the objective of each interview. Identify specific goals of each first, second, and third interview. Make these goals objective, and then stick to the plan.

Fourth and most important, watch out for subjective liking of candidates. We are not saying one should hire people who they do not like, but we often hire on a basis of whom we liked instead of their ability to do the job. We access personality, compatibility, and personal gut feelings more than objective abilities to perform. One good way to avoid this mistake is to give a patterned interview. Ask a set of written questions to every candidate. This provides a concrete group of answers that can be objectively compared to one another and allows you to assess abilities separated from personalities. You can still use a compatibility factor, but this format helps to prevent the interviewer from forgetting to ask objective, functional questions that allow true comparisons. Liking whom you hire is important – in fact it’s essential – but that aspect of the relationship should not obfuscate the person’s ability to do the job.

The manner in which people interview is important, and their ability to sell themselves is essential to the hiring process. However, the MEDIUM of the interview should not be the only MESSAGE by which a person is hired.

Confidentiality… A Right

admin — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 05:47:11 +0000

Boy, oh boy! Have we heard over the years how everybody, when they interview candidates, interviews confidentially? Yet some employers really don’t know what it means and even fewer realize the legal consequences of violating a candidate’s confidentiality, when he is looking for a new position.

If a prospective employer directly or indirectly causes a potential candidate to be fired or dismissed because of his actions in soliciting or interviewing him, the prospective employer is LIABLE. Not only can a company be held responsible, but also the employer can personally be pursued. In our litigious society, don’t think that a candidate who lost his job because you violated his confidentiality won’t think of suing you and your company for damages. If he doesn’t think of it, his lawyer will! The most recent case of this kind was settled for close to five million dollars (you read that right!). The candidate proved the hiring company not only cost him his job, but also because he was fired, it destroyed his career and future opportunities. Don’t think this can’t happen! It can! It does!

A person has a right to confidentially look for a new job, and no one has a right to cause him to lose his present one. We have heard the excuse that….”well, the candidate was looking for a job…. he ran the risk of being found out… he wanted to leave anyway… It’s his fault for even looking in the first place”. It’s enough to make our hair curl and a lawyer drool! The fact that a candidate is looking for a new job has nothing to do with someone causing him to lose his current position.

What We’ve Seen
We have seen prospective employers actually check the references of a candidate at the firm where he was presently employed. We have also seen elaborate messages left for candidates at their place of employment concerning times and details of interviews with prospective employers. We have seen rejection letters and “thank you for applying” letters e-mailed to candidates at their places of employment. We even saw a form letter sent to a candidate’s boss asking for a written reference regarding the character of the candidate and why he should become a member of their family, before an initial interview took place. With the advent of e—mail, we have seen prospective candidates communicate with perspective employers from their office e-mail. A perspective employer should not respond to a candidate this way, even if the candidate gives him or her permission. A perspective employer should specifically inform a candidate that he would not communicate this way. (Try to convince a jury that you didn’t know you were risking the candidate’s present job!)

What is even more astounding is the number of employees who think that there is nothing inappropriate about some of these actions. They feel that the candidate’s application gives them a license to ask anyone anything they wish.

Common Sense
The overall message here is to truly be CONFIDENTIAL in the process of interviewing and hiring candidates. Use common sense. If you are using a recruiter in a search, let him or her set up all the interviews. If you get to the reference stage, get references from the candidate at that time I Ask the recruiter to help with the reference checking. His or her professional expertise will protect everyone. DO NOT contact the candidate at his present place of employment. Even if the candidate says it’s permissible to do so, DON’TI In case of a dire emergency where the candidate has to be called at his present job, speak to him discreetly, and ask him to call you back. Don’t leave a name or number! In fact, it’s best, when asked by the receptionist or operator, “Who’s calling?” to state a friend or even an alias name. This will seem a bit extreme, but the alternative risk of your company hearing from the plaintiff’s attorney is worse.

Off-Site Meetings
If a company is interviewing a candidate from a competitor, it might be advisable to arrange interview meetings off site. Recruiting firms usually have facilities for this purpose. Restaurants are NEVER good places to interview; it just isn’t the best environment for both parties. Business lunches and dinners might be fine, but an evaluative interview already has enough built-in emotional stress, without the added social stress of making lunch (or dinner) talk. Interviewing off site provides a feeling of neutrality on everyone’s part. We’ve known instances of disgruntled receptionists calling their company’s competitor to tell them their star salesman was interviewing. Had the candidate not been seen at the interviewing company, this wouldn’t have happened. The candidate doesn’t feel he is compromising himself by going to the enemy camp.

Responsibility
The overall responsibility for confidentiality of a candidate being interviewed lies with the prospective employer. Even though the candidate may initiate the process, the onus of responsibility lies with the company who is considering him. Although the candidate may be soliciting a company, he can become an adversary very quickly. It isn’t hard to keep confidentiality as part of the process. It just takes care, forethought, and practical consideration.

‘Til the Fat Lady Sings When It’s Over

admin — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 21:46:42 +0000

Like Yogi says: “It ain’t over till it’s over!” It happened a few days ago… again. We tried to tell our client, a district manager, that he needed to keep interviewing until he had three or four qualified candidates to choose from, but he liked this one so much, he was sure he was going to hire him… he thought. Well, his boss who also had to interview the candidate was out for a week. The candidate was interested, the company was right, the job function was right and the money was right. Since our client had to go out-of-town the next week, by the time the candidate interviewed with the Vice President it was Wednesday of the following week.

Meanwhile, our candidate was interviewing, not only on positions we were referring him to, but on ones he had dug up for himself, and also on ones other recruiters had arranged for him. Our client’s attitude was that since they had the best money, job, company, etc., the candidate would be around when they were ready. As time went on, our candidate became more and more lukewarm about the deal. He knew objectively that the job was a good one, but he wasn’t getting any reinforcement from our client. Even though we were supplying positive enforcement for the “match”, the candidate wasn’t hearing it from whom it counted: The client company.

Although we encouraged the district manager to interview others we were working with, he was sold on the first candidate. The Vice President, however, thought it was a good idea to talk to others as well. The manager we were working with never asked his boss how he perceived the hiring process before they started and only now discovered his boss wanted to interview at least one other candidate. The district manager then called us, and needed to see more candidates, but still insisted that they were going to hire the original candidate. We informed him that the initial candidate was well into interviewing with others. Since an entire month had passed and he had had only two interviews with our client, we had an obligation to find him other interviews. The manager was sure the candidate would accept an offer from them, but he could do that only after he presented his boss with two more candidates.

It took another week to interview more candidates for his boss to review. An additional week went by before the Vice President could talk to at least one of the candidates. Although it was clear that the initial candidate was best, they took another four days to schedule a time when they could get with him to make an offer. The morning the meeting was to take place, our candidate accepted an opportunity with another one of our clients. Our initial client was furious with the candidate an unhappy with us.

What Happened
The job the candidate accepted really wasn’t quite as good for him. This company however, interviewed and hired within a week. They made him feel good about them and their company. They hired an excellent candidate because they had interviewed and hired expediently and with purpose. They had a need and they appeared decisive to our candidate. They looked like they knew what they were doing.

Our original client started all over and this time completed the whole process in two weeks. They hired a good solid candidate who will do well. He isn’t as good as the original candidate, but he will do well.

The lesson to all of this is obvious. Candidates will change their minds or make other choices. Just because a company offers a good solid opportunity for a good employee doesn’t mean every good candidate is going to wait for them to decide. In fact, the longer the process goes on the more indecisive a firm appears, no matter what the reasons.

Sell the Candidate
Good candidates need to be sold too. Once a good candidate is identified, the hiring process has to be a two-way street. A good candidate will not respond positively to a one-way street type of process. Hiring a good candidate “just ain’t over till it’s over.” Since it is a highly emotional human endeavor, the process will rarely run as predicted.

To insure successful hiring, a firm needs to set a timetable for the interviewing process. Schedules of all managers and officers involved should be coordinated BEFORE the process begins. A short list of three qualified candidates needs to be made so there is the insurance of backup in case the primary or secondary candidates do other things, or change their minds. We remind people all the time that our product in the placement profession is one of the few products that can say “No” and often does. Taking these initial planning steps will make the process flow easier, more efficiently, and effectively.