How do I make the right hire?

WHY IT WORKS: Selection matrix edition

Measure twice, cut once.

You might be familiar with the concept if you’ve ever engaged in any DIY projects or watched a home improvement show. If you haven’t heard this phrase before, it is referring to double checking that you have taken any measurements correctly before you cut your materials to size. This makes a lot of sense - that cut is irreversible, if you chop that piece of wood even just a millimetre too short it will not fit into place and you might just find yourself needing to start all over again. Spending more time and money to get a fresh piece is something we try to avoid. Some may even say measure three times!

Selecting the next person to join your team might be slightly different but has similar stakes - bringing in a new hire that isn’t a fit for your needs and your team can have wide ranging and long lasting impacts. Similarly you’ll need to spend additional time and money to find and bring in someone else, and you will also have the costs of: time spent training that unsuccessful hire, productivity and opportunity lost, any potential issues that need to be resolved, and impact on your overall team. Particularly for a small or medium sized organisation, these could have an outsized impact on your overall effectiveness.

So how to measure (at least) twice? Define what you need to measure to assess whether a candidate is suitable for your role, and use a selection matrix to ensure that each factor is measured more than once. ‘Measurement errors’ can happen for a variety of reasons. A non-exhaustive list includes: the candidate could have experienced something that didn’t allow them to demonstrate their full potential, the interviewer (or assessor) may have had their attention split across a number of priorities (especially true in a smaller organisation) and missed something, each person comes with a particular perspective shaped by their own experience that leads them to pay attention to certain aspects. 

Whatever the reason, gathering two data points on a factor you have deemed essential for the role, whether contrasting or confirmatory, gives more information on which to base your decision. Having clear decision criteria and a matrix to gather data also allows you to ensure that you have the same amount and quality of information about each candidate (1).

How to measure

The most effective ways to measure potential fit include:

• work samples assessment (an activity representative of the actual work they will engage in at your organisation)(2), 

• competency based interview questions, particularly those that focus on how they are demonstrated in a situation to achieve a desired outcome (2)(3) and 

• understanding whether iInterests and motivations aligned to the role (2)(3). 

They do not include

• reference checks which have low predictive validity (4) and are easily faked due to the casual nature of how they are gathered , 

• pressure tests (it is already a high pressure situation, and adding additional pressure does not provide better insight into their skills but reduces cognitive function) (5) or 

• Random brain teasers questions (6).

A matrix does not mean that you have to measure each competency or factor individually. For example an interview will cover communication skills and anything you want to ask about like coping with competing priorities, coming to speed on new skills, managing difficult conversations. A work sample would similarly cover all of those except perhaps coming up to speed on new skills. 

What you do want is to have another set of eyes and ears contributing to the assessment of your candidate so that you truly have two distinct data points for each measure. You should also have ideally the same person help you view all candidates so that you do not introduce other variables (like whether one person was a hard marker and the other an easy marker) into the mix. If you are a solo founder or a small team building growth you can also tap into advisory board members or hands on partners to support this hiring process, you just need to make sure it is someone who understands your organisational culture and needs. 

Combining methods of assessment increases the predictive validity of your overall process and reduces potential bias - a win-win (1). When you structure the process up front and apply the framework across all candidates you actually save time and effort in preparation for each interview and assessing the results after - win-win-win. 

Wondering about what to measure? Check out our role description ‘WHY IT WORKS’ and template.

Read more

1. Bäckström, M., & Björklund, F. (2017). Increasing systematicity leads to better selection decisions: Evidence from a computer paradigm for evaluating selection tools. PloS one, 12(5), e0178276. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0178276

2. Sackett, P. R., Zhang, C., Berry, C. M., & Lievens, F. (2022). Revisiting meta-analytic estimates of validity in personnel selection: Addressing systematic overcorrection for restriction of range. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107, 2040–2068. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000994

3. Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 262–274. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262

4. Russell, Craig. (2015). Reference Checks. 10.1002/9781118785317.weom050148. 

5. Behroozi, Mahnaz & Shirolkar, Shivani & Barik, Titus & Parnin, Chris. (2020). Does Stress Impact Technical Interview Performance?. 10.1145/3368089.3409712. 

6. Childers, Marie. (2020). Investigating the validity of brainteaser interview questions. Bowling Green State University submission.