Tag Archives: hiring

5 Common Interview Mistakes Recruiters Should Overlook

It’s up to the person recruiting to decide whether a mistake is due to anxiety or a sign that the candidate is a bad match for the organisation. Here’s five mistakes you should overlook…

By Esenin Studio/Shutterstock

Nightmares focusing on poor performance at work, especially job interviews, are common among adults in the US – and it’s easy to see why. Job interviews are stressful. Horror stories of interviews gone wrong are all over the internet. While they may be fun to read, it’s not easy to get through a job interview without making at least one mistake. 

What does a “perfect” interview really mean anyway? Interviews have disqualified candidates for everything from being late to “being too attractive.” Candidate error is just one factor in the overall equation; and it’s all too common to make a mistake under pressure. At the end of the day, it’s up to the recruiter to decide whether a mistake is due to anxiety or a sign that the candidate is a bad match for the organization. 

Here are some of the most common, but forgivable, job interview mistakes that recruiters should overlook. 

A candidate sounds rehearsed

Many candidates don’t make it through the first-round interview because they sound too stiff.Recruiters lose interest when a candidate sounds like they’ve memorized their answers. It’s hard to get a good sense of who that person is when they answer questions robotically. 

However, recruiters should consider that the problem isn’t the candidate’s presentation. It’s the questions they’re asking. Candidates apply to dozens of jobs during their search. Eventually, all the interview questions start to sound the same. Recruiters should avoid asking outdated, all too common interview questions that applicants answer at nearly every job interview. 

There’s a certain script that’s easy to fall into. If you find your candidate sounds a bit canned, try a different approach in the next round. 

A candidate talks too much

The opposite of a candidate who sounds rehearsed is a candidate who is too chatty. Anxiety or under-preparation is usually the driver behind a candidate who talks at length. Talking too much is usually seen by recruiters as a red flag – what if a candidate talks too much in a client presentation? Will this person be a distraction when working in teams? 

It’s not necessarily fair to assume that chattiness is a sign of weakness. It could be a sign of under preparation, or it could be a lack of experience: two factors that job training can address. But for recruiters who don’t have time to spend all day in an interview, using a one-way video interview can help. Generally, we’re against putting restrictive timers on pre-recorded videos. What if the candidate has technical difficulties? But, you can set the time to be long enough to account for technical glitches while still cutting down on nervous chatter. 

A candidate immediately responds to an interview request

Some recruiters consider replying to an interview request right away to be a red flag. Likewise, following up “too much” can make a candidate seem needy or desperate. In today’s hyper-connected society, expecting a candidate to wait an appropriate amount of time is a little too selective. 

It could be that a candidate follows up because so few companies are transparent about their process. While talking to your job interviewee, make sure to be upfront about your timeline and next steps. Managing expectations can help prevent any lingering confusion or excessive follow up from your potential new hires. 

A candidate is asking questions “on the fly”

It has become almost cliche for hiring experts to recommend candidates prepare their own questions. Recruiters disqualify candidates who ask questions “on the fly” – but why? Asking questions that are not pre-rehearsed can show genuine interest. A candidate who comes upwith questions on the spot is engaged, paying attention, and quick on their feet. Recruiters should prefer that over a candidate who simply pays lip service to the interview script. 

A candidate doesn’t bring a hard copy of their resume

It’s time to go green! If recruiters want a hard copy of the candidate’s resume, they are capable of printing it out themselves. Some recruiters see this as a sign that the candidate is under-prepared or careless. In reality, many people don’t have access to a printer. It’s an arbitrary ask that recruiters use to disqualify a candidate from making it to the next round. Wouldn’t you rather see an employee show their real-world skills rather than their ability to press print?

This article was written by Emily Heaslip was originally published on vervoe.

6 Recruitment Mistakes To Avoid

Here are six pitfalls to avoid in order to create a better recruitment process for all involved.

By Yeexin Richelle/ Shutterstock

Creating a better candidate experience seems simple enough and creating an experience that continues to improve is even better. Recruiters are often under tremendous pressure to recruit top candidates from hiring managers, organisational objectives, and the competitive landscape. Below we discuss six pitfalls recruiters can avoid to create a better recruitment process for all involved.

1. Posting Vague Job Descriptions

Posting a generic job position can ensure that a large pool of candidates applies. What it doesn’t ensure is that the candidates’ skill sets will accurately align with the functions of the position. A vague job description is a problem for both the hiring manager and candidate, as it effectively means that either someone’s time is wasted during screening and interviews, or a candidate will be hired for a position that doesn’t match their skills.

2. Not Engaging Hiring Managers/Operations Team Leaders

There are functions of a human resources department that need to be sealed off from the rest of the company. For instance, compensation, firing, promotion, etc. However, recruitment shouldn’t be as confidential. Recruiters should engage with hiring managers and operations leaders to build job descriptions and create recruitment processes that create an optimal candidate experience and hire the best talent available.

3. Creating a Time-Consuming Application Process 

An extensive application process is perceived as a strategy for recruiting only the most serious and interested candidates. Is it though? Front loading information gathering into the online application process will get you just that – people who are good at sitting at the computer and applying for jobs. What it doesn’t confirm is if the human behind that computer is the person best suited for the position you’re filling.

4. Having an unprepared interviewer 

An unprepared interviewer can send a “disturbing signal” to the candidate, leaving them turned off by the experience and the brand. Recruiters should conduct prep meetings, provide sample questions, and confirm interviewers are aware of the entire process and desired results before an interview is conducted.

5. Failing to Stay in Contact for Future Opportunities 

Failing to engage a quality candidate who was not given an offer is an enormous waste of resources. Sometimes great candidates don’t receive offers simply because there was a better-suited candidate for the position. If there is mutual interest, there should be a process in place to remain in contact with them for either future opportunities or current openings they may fit into.

6. Not Soliciting Candidate Feedback 

There is always room for improvement. Giving candidates an opportunity to provide feedback on the recruitment process gives recruiters some valuable insights which could help improve the process you currently have in place.

This article is written by Phillip Gold of empireresume.comand was originally published on vervoe.

Team Approach: How Procurement Pros Can Procure Talent Better

What’s harder than finding top talent for your procurement team? Finding the RIGHT talent!

The only thing harder than finding top talent in the current candidate driven market is to find the right talent. Especially those individuals that have the technical and collaborative skill-set required to be successful with today’s ever-growing list of expectations from Procurement practitioners.

In our recent experience with several clients we have witnessed organisations building teams from scratch due to newly undertaken Procurement Transformation initiative. There are many cases of leaders bringing along a key player or two with them, or sometimes executives will hire consultants or a trusted managed service provider (MSP) to help supplement their efforts. This got us thinking a bit more broadly about whether companies should consider hiring teams instead of individuals as they are undergoing transformations. Based on our experience, we would say yes to this option. The three main benefits we see to this approach are immediate impact, decreased conflict and increased collaboration.

Team Players

Companies increasingly want skills that are difficult to assess in job interviews but can be easily seen in a team setting environment. According to the World Economic Forum, following are the 10 skills most sought after by companies in 2020:

  1.  Complex problem solving
  2.  Critical thinking
  3.  Creativity
  4.  People management
  5.  Coordinating with others
  6.  Emotional intelligence
  7.  Judgment/decision making
  8.  Service orientation
  9.  Negotiation
  10. Cognitive flexibility

Subjective and biased candidate selection process

One of the many pitfalls for hiring managers is the subjective and biased candidate selection process. There is still a tendency to over-rely on the tough interview questioning and ultimately hire candidates that either look like us or come from similar schools and backgrounds. So, think of the impact if a Director or VP was hired that could bring on a team of people he or she knew well. Imagine a leader who knew exactly where to deploy resources to maximize their benefits, such as specific commodity expertise or management of key supplier relationships. This hiring manager would leverage the hard data they have on these preformed teams and position them to hit the ground running.

Conflict amongst team members

Another scourge facing employers today is that of conflict amongst team members. These conflicts are the leading cause for employee disengagement, burnout, turnover, lower productivity and creativity, etc. By hiring teams that have a history of successfully functioning at a high level, organizations increase the odds that their new hires will have the reservoir of rapport and goodwill to accelerate positive results. It’s analogous to why Procurement prefers early involvement when it comes to advanced engineering of products/services, so they can help stakeholders engage with the best suppliers. It’s a lot more difficult to select and negotiate when you have built your product specs around a specific supplier’s capabilities and technologies rather than vice versa.

Superior collaboration

And finally, there is the benefit of superior collaboration that comes from being part of a high performing team. Imagine how an empowered team would feel knowing that they have been hired en masse as the “A-Team” when it comes to the mission critical nature of their jobs. It would be an intense, yet collegial environment where they would almost be joining as insiders and delivering tangible value. Just this past year we have witnessed a couple of examples that are in stark contrast as it relates to hiring and building out groups. Company A was a CPG leader in the Midwest US and brought on a Head of Sourcing that, in less than two months, created and filled several roles. These were all filled with former direct reports and colleagues from her past two companies. Not only did the team come in firing on all cylinders in a new environment and deliver immediate results, this hiring manager was promoted to a newly created senior level position within 7 months of joining the company. Company B hired a leader that had the perfect experience on paper, but in his transformation journey he’s been a lot less successful. This was partly because he didn’t assimilate into the company culture and insisted on getting rid of most of the current employees on his team. Even though he had over 20 years’ experience with good companies, he failed to bring over a single person he has worked with in the past. His leadership style and reputation became a barrier to his and ultimately his department’s success.

While every company will have its own unique set of challenges surrounding types of candidates and expertise being sought, this team-hiring approach is certainly not a panache for all companies. But the ones that take the risk and try a novel approach to combat the challenges of procuring talent just may gain an advantage over their competitors that have not yet confronted the new reality in sourcing for the best.