Is hiring an art or a science?

Hi Karen,

I agree with your statement that "a multi purpose process is something most companies should keep in mind."

As I wrote previously - from a Call Center perspective – pre-employment screening/testing contributes significantly to increased Contact Center productivity – and to reducing turnover – and to maximizing employee retention.

I also wrote that pre-employment screening/testing is part of a multi-stage hiring process for Call Center Agents which includes:

Interview
Reference Checking
Job Preview
Skills Testing
Personality/Job-Fit Assessment

Pre-employment screening/testing are important components of an overall Best Practices approach to the hiring of Call Center Agents.

I would never suggest that any pre-employment screening instrument (including our SPAS Call Center Agent Pre-Employment Screening Software) was a 'Silver Bullet' - capable on its own of replacing all other components in a Best Practices approach to the hiring of Call Center Agents.

While many people view this as an art, hiring managers should definitely apply some science to the process. Many large companies, those large enough for full time HR staffs, have enough data to determine systematically determine what works and what doesn't. It's been widely reported that Google keeps track of a ton of data on its hiring process, the interviewers, and how well the candidate does after hiring and they uses that data to tune their process.

Another example is the current trend toward behavioral style interview questions. There have been studies that show that asking people to describe situations from their past work experiences rather than simply asking what they did is more predictive of their success in an organization.

Jeanne,

While generally agreeing with Andrew about the application of a rigourous methodology (science), we are dealing with human interaction and, therefore, should not underestimate the validity and power that "art" has to play in any hiring scenario. The data provides a model, a theoretical predictor, of how well a candidate will perform, how well they will adapt to your culture, how well they will respond to the demands of your market and/or client base, etc. What actually happens is not determined (or modelled) by data but rather by the individuals which make up the organization. Data cannot possiby predict how successfully a candidate will interact with the various point of human interaction in an organization.

Cheers,

William

The Uniform Guidelines of the employment process clearly defines the employment process for us - that job standards and minimum qualifications with respect to background and experience must be consistent with business necessity and specifically related to the job at issue. Employers should review job requirements and descriptions without regard to whoever is presently doing that particular job, but instead identifying the requirements for anyone who might hold that position."

The qualifications therefore
must be job-related for the position in question.
Its continued use is justified by business necessity.
A qualified individual is one who can perform the essential functions of a job, with or without reasonable accommodation.

When companies focus on their NEEDS - what it takes to get the job done, and quit focusing on the Minutia that has become the "norm" today..or their Wants.. then they hire based upon qualifications, not upon personal biases or subjective criteria.

Subjective Criteria is what I call the "science" - this is when employers will create standards like Degree Only requirements; Unemployed Need not apply; Good Credit only -- etc.. Criteria that only creates more hazards and roadblocks in the hiring process.. and does eliminate excellent candidates.

When they instead focus on - what did this candidate do at this job.. My competitor.. Did he excell there? is my competitor performing better than I.. then maybe I should be looking at These Skills instead of focusing on how this person will "fit" in with regards to our "culture"

What Can predict how well a Candidate will do at one's job.. well their previous experience at other companies similar to yours that is a PRIME indicator.. it worked well before "science" played a part 20+ years ago

With Respect David,
and no reflection on your personal product, but the MMPI which for decades had been used as a hiring tool was also developed under strict guidance as well.. and is now considered illegal as a hiring assessment tool.. but, it was definitely considered one of the best

As with anything in life, research and Knowledge is easy to gain, especially if it impacts anyone professionally or personally.

Science is not infallible. In our current modern world, things we believed to be true have been refuted over time; studies and the scientific method to test and disprove hypotheses through a conceptual frame work and experiments will always gather new information and Data, and it is important to remember that Science is self-perpetuating, It is impossible to separate the process of invention, discovery and science

Thus Science Cannot be proved, it can only be disproved. Support eventually comes from accumulated inability to discredit?. (Karl Popper)
Today, we have even seen that we cannot even prove the law of relativity (take the speed or refraction of light which is a constant, and yet have been disproved (eg the Michelson Morely experiment),

Ultimately it is important to remember that Scientific Selection just as Natural Selection is as scientific law which is a generalization based on personal observation.

There has been over the years incompatible observations by many scientists sufficient to raise doubts about the theory Scientific Selection in the hiring of employment.

It is relevant for Decision-makers to recognize that uncertainty is a fundamental aspect of the scientific process. There are and will be issues of misuse, lack of knowledge and training, invalid or unreliable results, many are not utilized correctly, and many are not specific to job relevance.

Remember A 1995 report by the federal Office of Technology Assessment found that more than 95 percent of people who failed integrity tests were incorrectly labeled as dishonest

RE Taylor Frederick W., 1964, Scientific Management – Taylor’s more general summary of the principles of Scientific Management
are better suited for inclusion into the TQM methodology, than the narrow definitions.
As he stated –
‘It is no single element , but rather the this whole combination, that
constitutes Scientific Management, which may be summarized as:
Science, not rule of thumb
Harmony, not discord
Cooperation, not individualism
Maximum output in place of restricted output
The development of each man to his greatest efficiency and prosperity
He also suggested that Scientific Selection should not only be utilized in the hiring process, but to implemented with Current Employees, determining personality with skill sets, and aspects of training.

So with that in mind, maybe a multi purpose process is something most companies should keep in mind, and not have one process as the end all.

I think every art form is elevated to the status of Art precisely because of the underlying specific artifacts, processes, and information (often described as science).

A world class pianist has logged over 10,000 hours of grueling, mind numbing practice and study of the processes that result in beauty expressed through the execution of the steps required to elicit sound correctly from a piano. The sounds are typically not elevated to the status of Art, until the musician survives three phases:
- Physical mastery of the actual components (left middle finger here, etc)
- Mastery of the aggregate (what is the full and complete narrative of the song as a composition)
- Imprinting individual customizations to become the story teller (art).

I would suggest that Art is the individually applied and tailored execution of sometimes very scientific processes and knowledge that have been owned by the executor after thousands of hours of meticulous practice, application and study.

The artful and consistently successful placement of candidates requires science elevated by experience to near mystical levels of Art.

My sense is that Art may take on a more mystical quality when facing the 10,000 hours of study required for mastery to transform route into flowing movement. The missing component is often the underlying passion that provides the drive to survive the mind numbing repetition. The drive required to survive the hours, the failure, the effort.

Speaking from a Call Center perspective – it is an art - where the science of pre-employment screening/testing contributes significantly to increased Contact Center productivity – and to reducing turnover – and to maximizing employee retention.

So which Tools and Techniques yield the best results?

In a Study on “The Comparative Validities of a Variety of Predictors of Hourly Wage Jobs in Reducing Turnover in New Hires” the following Results were uncovered:

Interview -- 14% Predictive Ability
Reference Checking -- 26% Predictive Ability
Job Preview -- 44% Predictive Ability
Skills Testing -- 53% Predictive Ability
Personality/Job-Fit Assessment -- 80% Predictive Ability

Interviews are a subjective and potentially biased process. This Study demonstrated that regardless of an Interviewer’s Skill – or a Candidate’s ability to present well – an Offer of Employment based on a strong interview alone only had a 14% chance of predicting the long-term effectiveness of a Job Candidate for a Call Center Agent Position.

Adding Reference Checking to the Interview Process only increased the likelihood of predicting long-term effectiveness in a Job Candidate for a Call Center Agent Position to 26%. And we all know that it’s getting harder to perform meaningful & insightful Reference Checks.

Job Previews - via software-based call simulators - or through having the Candidate just spend some time on the Production Floor shadowing Agents/Supervisors - only increases the likelihood of predicting long-term effectiveness in a Job Candidate for a Call Center Agent Position to 44%.

Skills Tests such as Typing Tests, Audio Transcription Tests, Windows Literacy Tests, etc. only increase the likelihood of predicting long-term effectiveness in a Job Candidate for a Call Center Agent Position to 53%. That’s just a bit better than flipping a coin!

With an 80% Predictive Ability, Personality/Job-Fit Assessments are best at forecasting future success of a Job Candidate for a Call Center Agent Position. Candidates for Call Center Agent job need to have a unique constellation of Traits - and specific amounts of those Traits - in order to successfully complete the Job Requirements. A Call Center Agent’s long-term success depends much more upon Temperament/Personality/Job-Fit Factors than on Product Knowledge, Past Experience or Skill Set. Personality/Job-Fit Assessments allow you to select new Call Center Agents who will fit your employment needs better - and stay on the job longer - leading to a Call Center Agent Workgroup that has more experience and is more productive.

Top performing Contact Centers drive their Revenue & Performance through superior hiring tactics. We help employers gain better insight & more accurate predictions as to which applicants from a pool of Candidates would perform up to, or beyond their established standards. You can find out about a Free Trial of SPAS Call Center Agent Pre-Employment Screening Software at http://www.telesoftsystems.ca/64201.html

MHO - look back to as recently as 20+ years ago, prior to when "amazing" techniques were "invented" to increase the "science" of hiring.

Well, it appears that back then people worked hard, they worked long, they achieved years of success with companies.They worked for the gold watch.. Many made that "accomplishment"

Today, the complete opposite.. now to find a person to stay more than 5 years at a job well... why do you think that is? I mean especially with all the amazing "Science" that has been "invented" in respect to the hiring process.

Maybe it was because it was simple.. the hiring process? Maybe it was looking at talent based upon focusing on ability and capability and of course temperment will have some discussion here of course

Personality Tests???? BAH, they are a sure way to create many problems for a company, (legal as well as non) and they really do not work..

20 Years as a recruiter, there are at least mthly examples where individuals had almost not been considered because of their personality test..and were considered the BEST employees when hired..

Personality tests should Only be a tool, and NEVER considered an Absolute -- the EEOC created a Great article and content on this subject.. --TESTING AND ASSESSMENT: AN EMPLOYER’S GUIDE
TO GOOD PRACTICES
http://www.onetcenter.org/dl_files/empTestAsse.pdf

In the employment industry there is always someone who has something to sell; whose way is "better" - and they are so totally sure that it is the more accurate way to hire..

Ask them what is their scientific data to demonstrate their product works better than anyone elses.. as someone told me yesterday.. 10 years of observation.. Observation.. and you want me to rely on your science based upon "observation"?

Personal observation within ones' own company would actually be more effective than a third party telling you that they can peg PEOPLE all fit in little tool they developed.

Wow, some strong opinions here and a lot of in depth analysis of a simple process.

Breaking it down simply and quickly in my eyes:

Recruitment is a set of processes driving to get from a to b. Basically getting a candidate a job with a company. Phone calls, interviews, references, etc etc. Thats the Science we all do it.

The art is how you get from a to b. Your individual flair, people buy from people. If your charismatic, honest and enable your candidates and you follow the science bit its a done deal.

So yes its a bit of both.

Strong opinions Karen!

All Versions of the SPAS Call Center Agent Pre-Employment Screening Software were developed in accordance with all regulations set for the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and the National Council on Measurement in Education, 1985). All Versions of the SPAS Software have been validated to evaluate Job Candidates for telephone-based positions, without Adverse Impact upon Minorities, and meet all the Principles for the Validation and Use of Personnel Selection Procedures (Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Inc., 1987).

All Versions of the SPAS Software exceed all Requirements set forth by the US Federal Government's Uniform Guidelines of Employee Selection Procedures (Federal Register, 1978), the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Civil Rights Act of 1991, the Age Discrimination Employment Act (ADEA), 42 U.S.C. 1983, and 42 U.S.C. 2000e, the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA) of 1987, and the Canadian Employment Equity Act (EEA) of 1987.

SPAS Call Center Agent Pre-Employment Screening Software is a valid, reliable, legally defensible predictor of telephone-based Job Performance in the United States, Canada and everywhere else in the world where the 'Language of Work' is English. The SPAS Software has also been localized for the French-Canadian Language, and is in the process of being localized for the North American Spanish Language as well.

The issue of eliminating Adverse Impact on Minorities and following EEOC Guidelines has been accomplished by providing Validation Proof that rates at which Minority Applicants pass are not significantly less than that of Mainstream Candidates ("No Adverse Impact") and by proving that the Selection Test is Valid, ("Related to Job Performance"). Validation has also statistically demonstrated that the SPAS Call Center Agent Pre-Employment Screening Software does indeed Predict a Candidate's Long-Term Effectiveness on the job and, thus, the Test is "Consistent with Business Necessity".

The Validation of every Version of the SPAS Call Center Agent Pre-Employment Screening Software involved a Longitudinal Study of at least 700 employment candidates and at least 300 New Hires located in at least three separate Call Center facilities. After a period of 6 months a further Performance Study was also conducted. The overall results of both the Longitudinal & Performance Studies for every Version of the SPAS Software has yielded a 90% Hit-Rate for Hiring Predictions.

The Validation Process for all SPAS Versions is continual and ongoing. Annually, 10%-15% of SPAS Users volunteer to export their Candidate Results to our central tracking system where the SPAS Testing Data is retained. This enables us to perform Statistical Analyses of the SPAS Results for ongoing Research / Development / Validation of the Various Versions of the SPAS Software Program. At no time has the Predictive Ability of any Version of the SPAS Software dropped below 90%.

SPAS Call Center Agent Pre-Employment Screening Software is sold on an Unlimited Usage License basis. There are No "per Test" Fees - "Annual Renewal" Fees – or any other User Fees whatsoever. Technical Support for SPAS Software is Free & Unlimited as well. SPAS Licenses are also sold with a 6 Month, 100% Money-Back Guarantee of Satisfaction.

You can find out about a Free Trial of SPAS Call Center Agent Pre-Employment Screening Software at: http://www.telesoftsystems.ca/64201.html