The best interviews feel like a casual conversation

But, what candidates want more than 'feeling' that the interview went well is to be evaluated fairly.

And managers want the same.? They want the interview to result in fair assessment and accurate hiring results.

But unfortunately..

Most leaders using conversational interviewing techniques aren't gathering comprehensive decision data.? They're simply winging it, and making a gut-feel decision.??

I don't blame them.? If I were in their position, I'd undoubtedly do the exact same thing.?

If you're a leader, and have worked with numerous companies, experienced numerous interview processes, some draconian, others laissez faire..

?

And you see 'absolutely' no discernable difference in the end result, what conclusion would you eventually arrive at??

Case and point!

?

The only reason I don't, is because I have a love affair with the scientific method!

Early in my career I got this ridiculous, hair-brained idea.? I thought that "if" I could solve the hiring problems everyone was simultaneously complaining about and then pretending didn't exist, and become good, really good I'd always be in high demand.?

Those of you who are tops in what you do, I don't have to tell you that it's much more complicated than this..

But, I dedicated myself to developing a systematic process through testing, refining, measuring, innovating, and maintaining focus on improving results.

Along the way, I discovered that a conversational interview was a key part of accurate results, for reasons I gave yesterday.

?

Here's how to do it, and the #1 thing that immediately goes wrong.

1.? define the job as "doing" not "having".

- I need you to build x. Not I need you to have a, b and c. [hammer, saw, nail gun] or [Java, Python, SaaS experience].

- having inspires testing

- building requires exploration of past projects to understand how skills were used to deliver results.

?

2.? define exactly how you will measure results before you start.

- Beyond the basic skills, I need someone who's easy to get along with, is able to engage in healthy productive conflict in order for the team to arrive together at solid technical solutions.

- using data gathered during the interview, I will rate them as follows:

????????????? 1-causes conflict, antagonistic

????????????? 2-avoids facing problems, can't handle conflict

????????????? 3-openly addresses problems, accepts conflict

????????????? 4-embraces conflict, inspires healthy conversation, leads resolution efforts

????????????? 5-anticipates conflict, encourages diplomatic discussion, mitigates emotions, leads team to agreement and adoption

?

3. Inspire useful, free-flowing, bias-reducing conversation

We're building out SaaS application using x, y & z.? Could we talk about a recent project which has similar aspects or technologies?? I'd love to hear all the details, so pick something really challenging so we can dig in to the details.? Then let them talk, take notes, and only interrupt to ask questions to inspire them to share deeper details.

????????????? -how many were on the team?

????????????? -who was responsible for what?

????????????? -how long did it take?

????????????? -how did that become a roadblock?

4.? Here's where things go awry!?

a) you fail to do #2, and define how you're going to measure.

b) you don't schedule time immediately after the interview to reflect back on the conversation and ask yourself pre-defined questions about the candidate's capabilities.? Then provide 'proof'.

?

Assessment:

Did I see [historical] evidence that this candidate handles conflict well? How would I rate on the 1-5 scale.?

- now provide evidence.? When discussing his project at Omni-Fly.. Bob explained what happened when they realized the 3rd party API they'd chosen couldn't be used because.. here's what happened.? Bob's explanation led me to believe that he was a key part of seeing this resolved quickly, and ensuring the entire team was in agreement.

?

[that's evidence]

Not, Oh, I really liked him.? He was easy to talk with and loves object pascal! Ooohhh.. he'll be a perfect fit for our team.

I was working on an analogy comparing data driven assessment (DDA) to test driven development (TDD) because I see a similarity between how they both define measurement of quality/results in advance.?

But, my TDD knowledge is only surface deep.? Does this resonate?

Here's the roadblock.?

Because they've been jaded by process pushed at them, many leaders run when they hear 'process" or 'system'.?

Yes, it sounds complicated. It's not.? Compared to most things you do, this is like baking a cake.? Just follow the recipe and results are ?good.? Mastery comes with practice.?

Most things you intend to assess you define once. Like the conflict example.? It's the same across any position you will hire for your team.

Each time you hire, all that's needed is a brief update to your assessment.

Stuff that's highly specific to the unique job.?

New, different, but not complicated, right?

?

#visionaryleader #hiring #interviewing #softwareengineering #hireinreverse

?

PS– I write about hiring and leading teams. Assessing culture fit?? And job searches that result in career growth, meaning, impact, satisfaction.