Recently I had the opportunity to search for a replacement for a valued employee who had moved on, with my blessing, to a position that not only paid more, but also better fit her skill set and desires. In a clear sign of the economic times, more than 180 people responded to a single advertisement on Craig’s List and a quarter inch ad in the local newspaper. After several rounds of resume vetting, the list was whittled down to a dozen of the best candidates who were then invited to a first round of interviews. The selection committee consisted of most of the people in the department where I work as well as one “outsider,” a respected colleague from another department, whose role was to act as a reality check.
By the end of the first round of interviews a few of the candidates clearly warranted a second look. That evening as I pondered what had transpired at the interviews I knew I faced a difficult decision. Two of the remaining candidates were internal prospects. That is, employees from within the organization. The third, and my personal favorite, came from outside the organization. My dilemma: Do I pick one of the insiders because they were a “safe” choice? Or do I take a chance on an outsider?
The inside candidates were the safe choice because they were known quantities in terms of their skills sets, their daily work habits and their personalities. That, combined with the fact that hiring from within is often a morale builder for the organization, especially one like ours where internal promotion opportunities are rare, made this an apparently obvious choice. Alternatively, hiring the outsider would bring a new set of eyes to the team and perhaps help us move in new directions. Not only that, I was just impressed by the preparation of the outside candidate. She had clearly done her homework and knew a lot about us. Her answers to the questions were precise and comprehensive. And her personality was clearly extrovert, which appealed to me because I’ve learned from long experience that I needed to work with someone who could offset my tendency to be an introvert. As I came to work the next morning, I was leaning heavily toward the outside candidate.
We sat down with one more candidate who had been unable to meet with us on the previous day. By the time she had finished answering the first question, I knew that we had found the perfect candidate. The difference? Her personality and attitude were authentic and she “clicked” with every member of the selection team. On paper, she had nearly identical qualifications to the other leading candidate. Where the other leading candidate had a sparkling presentation and attitude, as one member of the selection team commented, she seemed “almost too perfect.” Ultimately, I chose to go with the last candidate because her personality fit with the dynamic of not only the team who interviewed her, but also with what I knew to be the personalities of the people who were not in the room, the rest of the organization.
Jim Collins repeatedly said in his book “Built for Success” it is all about getting the right people on the bus. Peter Carbonara wrote in “Hire for Attitude, Train for Skill” (Fast Company, http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/04/hiring.html) that “the single best predictor of future behavior is past behavior.” Sam Greengard, in Workforce Management noted, “you can’t turn a curmudgeon into a cheerleader” (http://www.workforce.com/section/06/feature/23/47/86/). So far, it looks like we brought the right person onto the bus.
