What do you do when feedback differs from your candidate assessment?

é importante que os entrevistadores tenham sido treinados para combater vieses inconscientes, garantindo ao máximo que as percep??es n?o estejam "banhadas" em opini?es próprias a respeito do candidato. é importante também que pessoas diversas participem do processo como entrevistador, pois garantem uma vis?o mais global a cerca do mesmo candidato. Quando os recrutadores divergirem entre si, deve-se considerar elementos cruciais para o cargo e o bom desempenho das atividades como um norteador no momento da decis?o. Nunca é uma decis?o fácil optar por um candidato, nós recrutadores nos sentimos muitas vezes tendenciosos a acolher histórias mais próximas das nossas! Por isso treinamento é t?o importante.

It is really important to Consider Different Perspectives: Keep in mind that different people may have different perspectives on a candidate's suitability for a role. It's possible that someone else saw qualities or red flags that you didn't notice. Take these varying viewpoints into account and consider whether they add value to your overall assessment. It is also imperative to Communicate Openly: If you decide to update your assessment based on the feedback, communicate your decision transparently. Explain your thought process to the individuals involved and let them know that you value their input. Transparency helps maintain trust and professionalism.

Accepting the difference in opinion and having an open mind is important. It helps bring aspects/attributes that others might have missed or might be a learning for other interviewers on what they could do next time to get the information.

In my opinion, it is important to let everyone describe what they really saw/observed. Not their thought on what they think a candidate meant to say/did, but what was actually said. Sometimes, you didn't see a red flag, or it didn't come up in your round of interviews.

In my experience creating a question set for each area being evaluated, assigning specific areas to the interviewers with a question bank, and discussing the level of skillset in each area being evaluated, prior to interviews helps eliminate these types of discrepancies and also ensures that all candidates are being evaluated by the same criteria.

When feedback differs from your candidate assessment, it's essential to approach the situation with an open mind and a willingness to learn and adapt. Here are some steps you can take: 1. Review the Assessment Process 2. Understand the Feedback 3. Compare Feedback with Assessment 4. Consider Bias and Subjectivity 5. Seek Additional Opinions : If possible, involve other team members or colleagues in the assessment process. 6. Reevaluate Criteria 7. Provide Context: 8. Focus on Constructive Feedback 9. Reflect and Adapt 10. Continuous Learning 11. Make an Informed Decision I would have been happy to describe each point in detail, but given the word limit, I wasn't able to. Please reach out for additional information. Thank you

In my experience, it's good to be in alignment with the hiring managers, get clarification as to what they need, want, and observed from the candidate. Stay open and transparent accepting different perspectives and find a common ground to come to a general consensus. Not everyone will ask the same interview questions, it's good to share additional skills, strengths, and assessments about the candidate that may have been overlooked.

Our opinions may differ considerably, they may be seeing the aspect we may have missed. So in case of differing opinions, it's better to get a clarification on them. This might not only assist in future selections but understanding the viewpoints, what they actually want from the candidates. This approach in assessment is the best when considering the time and money involved in selecting the best minds .

In all facets of life people see things, people, and events differently. Following that logic it makes sense that interviewers may view candidates differently and thus provide opposing feedback. It’s imperative to share your honest opinion about a candidate, and to stand up for your observations. You may be wrong, or if hired the candidate may prove you wrong, but different perspectives is why multiple interviewers and interview rounds are needed. You will see something someone else might miss. There is rarely a perfect candidate, but taking all interviewers’ honest feedback into consideration help teams find the best fit out of their candidate pool.

Finding common ground is a bland, generic 4th step, and not necessarily a safe one. It looks good on paper, but it's the kiss of death for vibrant, thriving teams. I encourage dissent. Decisions (especially hiring decisions) do not require consensus AND if someone's evaluation differs, we want the team to adequately evaluate and mitigate. A focus on compromise or consensus most often leads to -Group think -Safe, bland scorecards - "I'm on the fence" - Interviewers who are disillusioned/checked-out None of these support a thriving hiring process that improves and adapts to shifting contexts. Consensus is an unrealistic expectation to have of any group, especially in organizations that are committed to fostering diversity and inclusion.