How to Identify "Traps" in Recruitment 3 Selected Articles

Recruitment managers try to improve recruitment efficiency through better interview and evaluation techniques. In fact, the key to finding the right person in the right way is not "technology" but "thinking". The following are some common misconceptions about recruitment:

1. The target competence is not clearly defined.

The negative impact of recruitment mistakes in senior positions on the company is complex and difficult to estimate, so it is best to find out what qualities and abilities the company needs candidates to have before starting recruitment, and whether there are conditions within the company to accommodate these abilities.

A leading commodity company recruited a well-known training and organizational development expert as the deputy director of human resources. But the deputy director left after only one year, because she was only an expert in training and development, and she was not good at dealing with corporate politics and internal contradictions. The deputy director needs to report to both the director of human resources and the vice president in charge of human resources. The vice president who has been in office for less than half a year wants her to focus on establishing a training and knowledge management system that can continuously cultivate R&D talents from within, while the director asks her to cooperate with the recruitment and employee relations team to speed up attracting talents from outside and solve the problem of turnover rate, so as to share the pressure of the director himself. On the other hand, because the locked position of vice president was unexpectedly occupied by airborne troops, the disgruntled human resources director was determined to openly and openly fight with the vice president, using veterans to control the human resources department and overhead superiors. The two bosses don't communicate with each other and secretly compete, which makes the deputy director always in a dilemma. As a result, the training and recruitment work progressed slowly, and the exhausted deputy director's contract expired and he had no choice but to leave.

If the company's top management has a clear understanding of internal problems, adjust the organizational structure or original personnel, and at least list being good at surviving in the cracks or being able to deal with internal conflicts powerfully as the core competence that the incumbent must have at the beginning, things may not be so bad. However, how many companies can or are willing to face up to this kind of thing?

2. It's all about headhunters.

Hiring managers tend to hand over senior or sensitive positions to headhunters, which may not be a good idea at all. At least the following positions are not suitable for headhunters:

A there are only a handful of suitable candidates, and the company clearly knows where they are; B most technical positions are not management positions (unless there is a great demand for technical talents).

Even if headhunters are used, it is more important to choose a good consultant than a prestigious headhunting company.

3. Take experience as ability

The popularity of the candidate's former employer will have a great influence on the evaluation results, and the danger of this mindset lies in ignoring the environmental factors that form or exert this ability.

A sample survey of professional managers shows that more than 80% executives are not fully competent in the new company, because their past experiences are difficult to fully replicate and play a role in the new environment, and some even become lessons. More importantly, many of these managers have no ability and conditions to develop new abilities and experiences after the old experience has failed, and they have embarked on the decline of their careers. Well-known large multinational companies can operate smoothly in the world because of long-term accumulation, ubiquitous fine processes and standardized operating environment. Many managers just assimilate and form habits, but it seems to the outside world that they invented them. This illusion, they sometimes believe it themselves. Many "masters" of multinational "big schools" can't survive the Wulin Congress of private or foreign-funded small and medium-sized enterprises because they are divorced from the original environment and culture and don't have the ability to develop new abilities and the necessary objective environment. Therefore, the selection of senior talents depends on the fact that the hiring manager or headhunting consultant can clearly distinguish which are the real abilities of the candidates and which are just the aura that can't be taken away.

4. Credulous background investigation

The lack of social integrity and employment failure caused by the above misunderstandings make background investigation more and more used in the recruitment of senior talents. However, trusting the interview results of strangers has created another misunderstanding. We are unlikely to decide an important thing for ourselves according to some feelings expressed by others, but the hiring manager is likely to easily adopt the words of a stranger on the other end of the phone when deciding an important person for the company.

Only 19% of managers will explain the reasons for leaving the company in detail when the employer checks with them, and only 15% of managers will explain the work habits of candidates with specific cases. In eastern culture, the following three common sayings are annotations that distort background investigation:

A. the grace of dripping water deserves the return of spring water. When some managers are in office, they exchange small favors, relax requirements, and attack and defend alliances for "mass base." If your survey object is the beneficiary, you will definitely get a positive evaluation.

B.it's never too late for a gentleman to take revenge for ten years. Diligent and pragmatic managers will inevitably have some disgruntled subordinates or colleagues. If your survey object is them, your chances of getting negative comments are close to 100%.

C.this is none of our business. What should we do when we are asked to evaluate someone we know who is irrelevant? Squeeze out one or two small things to cover up the whole thing, or simply say, I'm a little impressed, but it's okay. Most people are like us.

There seems to be a reason not to accept the respondents provided by the candidates themselves, or other objects we are looking for by reverse thinking. The reason why there are enough facts in court is that the prosecution and the defense have a direct face-to-face cross-examination process, and the credibility of the background investigation composed of only one person's words is really doubtful. However, we often don't set aside time for more specific and reliable background checks.

5. False image experience

The biggest difference between excellent enterprises and ordinary enterprises is that the former can always let top managers find that their personal preferences and values are consistent with the company's cultural concept with real and concrete work experience, so they can solve problems creatively with unprecedented passion, infect employees and customers, and form strong leadership and influence. These people who are passionate about their work will not chop and change for a little salary. This iconic experience cannot be instilled and cultivated.

Some companies have wisely discovered this, but mistakenly want to create an ideal cultural environment. A company tries to create a family-style democratic management corporate culture by collectively interviewing department managers, employee mailboxes and opening the door to communicate policies. However, in practice, managers gradually find that the so-called "family atmosphere" is just a synonym for cliques, and "democratic management" is a cloak of bullying the upper and deceiving the lower, replacing the overall interests with local interests, and the information obtained by "open door communication" will always be known by some irrelevant people.

6. superstitious loyalty

Loyalty is a frequently mentioned standard of workplace ethics. A person's life can be roughly divided into five stages: growth period (before 15 years old), exploration period (between 15 years old and 25 years old), establishment period (between 25 and 45 years old), maintenance period (between 45 and 65 years old) and sunset period (after 65 years old), in which the establishment period is the golden period of career. This stage is divided into three stages: trial period (about 25-30 years old), stable period (about 30-40 years old) and crisis period (about 35-45 years old). During the probation period and crisis period, a person's life ambition, personal experience advantages and values will gradually become clear and fixed, while the career changes between the ages of 35 and 45 during the crisis period are more decisive, and every change is decisive. Recruiting managers or headhunting consultants who don't know enough about the law of career development and have little experience often take whether there are as few records of career changes as possible between the ages of 35 and 45 as the main indicators to judge loyalty and career stability, which is inevitably biased. Some necessary adjustments and changes must consider comprehensive factors and cannot be simply measured by time and frequency. This article is compiled in China Training Network. Welcome to read the reference.