Follow Us:

Go, No Go

this is the basic quality check process. you run the finished or intermediate product through a series of filters or checks. If the product goes through, it is passed; if not, it is a reject.

The recruiting approach commonly being adopted by organisations across the globe are uncannily similar. The filters & tests change depending on what the company does and what they are hiring for, but the concept is same.  If the candidates pass through all the checks, they are selected, if they falter at any stage, they are out.

Human beings, unlike products, react differently to different situations and with different people. The filters themselves ( the people who evaluate or interview) are influenced by their perceptions & their own knowledge. Very often you find a candidate being screened by an HR person who has no clue about the role requirements at the ground level. The wsj article on why HR makes hiring mistakes touches on this. Two line managers may evaluate the same candidate differently.  The funny thing is that the fitment process does not stop at hiring but continues through-out the employee life cycle. Rarely is any attempt made at employee valuation.

In effect, the whole exercise is one of trying to fit the candidate to parameters that are , rightly or wrongly, pre-defined.

Imagine, you have a position to fill, you have a bunch of resumes ( most often already screened by someone else based on preset parameters) to look at.  How do you filter out the ones whom you want to meet ? Do you keep only the position in mind when filtering or do you keep an open mind to look for good talent ?

Let’s say you have shortlisted some candidates based on their resumes ( Go; No Go) and are now ready to meet them face to face. What are the thoughts in your mind when you sit down for the discussion ? are you looking for a candidates who fits in to your job description or do you propose to evaluate the candidate & see how they can deliver value to you ?

Do you start with a cost band in mind or look for the right talent & pay for what it deserves ?

Do companies hire to stick to the budgeted numbers or are open to induct a talent even though the budget does not provide for it ?

These and many other questions at every stage in the process provide you a choice between fitment and genuine evaluation.

when we work with  fitment as the goal, we start with a few assumptions such as -

1. we have the exact and correct description of the role

2. we are absolutely certain of  the qualities/skills needed to execute that role ?

3. we are looking to fill a current position

4. the salary band we have in mind is reasonable cut-off

5. the qualifications ( not skills) we have decided for the role, are appropriate ones & anyone without those qualifications is not a good fit.

6. we look to hire the functional person within the candidate & not really worry about the person’s strengths/abilities in other areas.

What if we

1. start with the assumption that we know the JD but the boundary conditions are fluid

2. are looking to see as to what the candidate brings in, to play his role in this position

3. are looking ahead ( as to how a candidate may enlarge the role or add more value than envisaged)

4. focus on the skills & not qualifications

5. look at hiring the person as a whole, not just the sales or operations person within the candidate.

No doubt there has to be some process for filtration. No hiring manager has the time to go through every profile & to meet every candidate that applies for a job.

A good first step would be to keep an open mind while meeting the few screened & shortlisted candidates. To look at a candidate as they are & what value they can deliver as against trying to pass them through some filters.

Originally posted on Talentmoon Blogs

Views: 169

Tags: employee, screening, valuation

Comment by Sandra McCartt on January 29, 2012 at 1:09pm
There seem to be some good thoughts in this blog and some glaring fallacies that would take too long to address but most of it was lost by the interjection of another one of those made up buzzwords.

Please God, there is no such word as "fitment". Let's not come up with more ridiculous, stilted buzzwords that make recruiters sound more ridiculous than we already sound.
Comment by Subramani B on January 29, 2012 at 10:27pm

Thanks for the feedback Sandra.

Fitment is a favorite with the hiring managers. so like it or not, we can't run away from it. I don't have so much of problem with the word, but more with the way it is being misused as a rejection tool. 

The thoughts in the blog are in the nature of questions at this stage, and i hope some answers can emerge from the feedback from other members. 

Comment by Sandra McCartt on January 30, 2012 at 3:15am
Fitment is a noun it means a fixture normally built in cabinets or equipment. Fitment can not relate to people. We can certainly run away from words that are being turned into jargon. The verbing of nouns becomes more ridiculous with each one that comes down the pike.

People either fit a position or they are not a fit. People cannot be a fitment or not a fitment unless they turn into an inanimate object that be nailed to a wall or attached to a car tire or become a part of the plumbing.

As to hiring managers saying that a candidate is not a fit for a position. A candidate may have excellent skills and still not have the needed qualification to be a fit for a position. A candidate may have excellent accounting skills but if he doesn't have experience in oil and gas and the client wants oil and gas experience he doesn't have either the specific skills or qualifications to be a fit for a position.

A candidate may have a "sales personality", be very bright and want to sell but if the hiring company wants someone with three years proven sales experience who has existing relationships with customers, someone with raw or unproven skills is not a fit for the position.

To be a fit for a position a candidate must have both the skills and the qualifications unless a company is hiring an entry level person that they plan to train. Trying to put a round peg in a square hole.

When candidates have been screened and short listed they have already been filtered by the recruiter and will be filtered again to determine if they fit the needed qualifications as well as the company culture. Hiring an unqualified person is expensive and sets both the company and the employee up for failure.
Comment by Sandra McCartt on January 30, 2012 at 3:33am
Read Paul Crowley's blog "Give The Customer What He Wants". He says it all.

Comment

You need to be a member of RecruitingBlogs to add comments!

Join RecruitingBlogs

Marketing Partners

RecruitingBlogs on Twitter

© 2014   Created by RecruitingBlogs.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

scroll to the top