With information age dawning upon us, the hiring delays seem to be increasing and organisations globally seem to be embracing the change to slow down on the hiring process.
While applicants may find the hiring process frustrating and time consuming, it makes complete sense for companies to slower down on hiring costs and abide by the motto, “Hire slow, Fire Fast,” says Jeff Kudisch, assistant dean of corporate relations and managing director of the Office of Career Services at the University of Maryland’s Robert H. Smith School of Business.
Companies are now making applicants jump through many hoops by deployment of tools that conduct in-depth employee background checks, drug tests, skill tests and personality tests followed by group panel discussions to zero down on a perfect candidate for the right job.
In an age driven by information, Kudisch adds: “People need to multitask, think strategically, think relationally and deal with a variety of people. It’s a complex, global workplace. Why shouldn’t we be using sophisticated tools to predict success?”
Selection is often given lip service, but managers are unwilling to spend significant time and resources on it. Companies have no problem issuing their workers $1,500 computers. “But it’s difficult to get organisation leaders to spend $200 on an assessment that could provide great insights on an applicant that might otherwise take them a year to learn.”
See: Reasons for Hiring Process Delays: Glassdoor Analysis
Low skill jobs seem to be disappearing from the economy and the kinds of jobs that are on a rise require lots of judgement and creativity. These jobs are harder to hire and retire; hence the recruitment process takes long, thus leading to hiring delays. France, Germany, United Kingdom and Canada are known for slow hiring process, while in United States the recruitment is comparatively fast and easy.
It seems companies have now begun embracing insights from the human capital literature, taking into consideration the fact that unstructured interviews are an extremely unreliable way of judging people. Depending on job level, and candidate competencies, different tests and measurement attributes could be deployed to understand if the individual qualifies for a particular role.
Kudisch recommends combining such tools as business-reasoning tests, personality assessments, integrity tests, “fit” measures, structured behavioural interviews and even full-blown job simulations to assess candidates during interview. Given the fact that companies are now adopting cautious hiring approaches, and taking long time to fill in talent gaps, this in turn has to be effectively communicated to all short-listed job applicants as well.
Kudisch added: “Selection is a two-way street. We have to monitor the quality and ROI of the tools used to select individuals but also monitor applicant reactions to hiring processes.”
Healthy communication with job applicants explaining reasons for hiring delays will help them to be less vexed about their selection for the job. In case, companies fail to do that, the word will be out among talented professionals in the industry that your company has a tendency to string applicants. While you might not want to short change in your hiring decisions, inefficient processes can frustrate job seekers and thus lead to loss of top talent. This will negatively impact an organisation’s brand in the competitive marketplace.”
Also read: 6 Hiring Mistakes Most HR Professionals Do
