Beyond Gut Feel: The Art and Science of Effective Hiring Decisions

Hiring the right person for a role is one of the most critical decisions a business can make, yet it’s also one of the most challenging. Often, even after thoroughly interviewing candidates, hiring managers find themselves making final decisions based on intuition or “gut feel.” While intuition can be a valuable tool, it's essential to supplement it with a more structured and data-driven approach.

The Perils of Gut Feel

Gut feelings, while often accurate, can be misleading. We may be drawn to candidates who possess certain qualities that resonate with us, such as charisma, humour, or a compelling narrative. However, these factors may not necessarily correlate with job performance. Our inherent biases can influence our perceptions, leading us to overlook qualified candidates who may not fit our idealised image of the perfect employee.

The Role of Gut Feel in Hiring Decisions

Hiring often becomes an emotional process. While candidates may offer equally comprehensive answers to interview questions, demonstrate relevant skills, and have aligned experience, hiring managers tend to gravitate toward certain individuals based on an intangible sense of “fit.” Research in psychology and human resources shows that gut feel is frequently tied to traits like charisma, storytelling ability, humour, and perceived attractiveness. The concept of "liking" someone plays a significant role; as humans, we are biologically predisposed to feel more comfortable with people who resemble ourselves or exhibit qualities we admire. However, this instinct can cloud our judgment, causing us to prioritise subjective qualities over objective competencies.

How Internal Biases Influence Hiring Decisions

Our internal biases play a powerful, often subconscious, role in hiring. Some common forms of bias in hiring include:

Attractiveness Bias: Research has shown that candidates perceived as more attractive are often rated more favourably, regardless of their actual competence. This bias can lead to overlooking highly qualified candidates who may not fit a conventional standard of attractiveness.

Similarity Bias: Often, hiring managers favour candidates who remind them of themselves or someone they admire. This similarity bias can lead to a lack of diversity and the hiring of “like-minded” employees, potentially resulting in a team that mirrors the strengths, weaknesses, and limitations of the hiring manager.

Charisma and Storytelling Bias: Charismatic candidates who can tell a compelling story often have an advantage in interviews. However, storytelling skills do not necessarily equate to job performance. This bias may lead to hiring candidates based on their ability to engage during the interview rather than their actual experience or skills.

Humour and Engagement: Candidates who are humorous and engaging in conversation can create a positive interview experience, but these qualities may not translate into performance on the job. Overemphasis on such traits can distract from assessing core competencies.

Competency-Based Questioning: Is It the Solution?

Competency-based questions, which focus on specific behaviours and past experiences, are widely used to provide a structured and fair interview process. The idea is to evaluate a candidate's past performance as an indicator of future success. However, in today’s job market, many candidates are well-prepared for competency-based questions. With countless online resources, candidates can rehearse answers to common questions, potentially creating a scripted and polished, yet inauthentic, interview experience. This calls into question whether competency-based questions are enough on their own to predict a candidate’s future success accurately.

While competency-based questions add value, they should not be the sole factor in making hiring decisions. Relying exclusively on this method can lead to hiring “interview stars” who may not excel in real-life scenarios. Additionally, overreliance on competency questions can discourage spontaneity, creativity, and flexibility, limiting insights into how a candidate might perform in unexpected or changing situations.

Are We Hiring People Like Ourselves?

Another potential pitfall in hiring is the tendency to choose candidates who reflect our own qualities. This inclination can lead to an organisational echo chamber, where new hires reinforce existing habits, ideas, and approaches rather than introducing fresh perspectives. When hiring managers gravitate toward candidates who share their qualities, the organisation may inadvertently perpetuate weaknesses or blind spots within the team. While hiring someone who mirrors our strengths can seem appealing, it may also result in missed opportunities for growth and innovation.

Without awareness, hiring managers may fall into a pattern of seeking “clones” of themselves, thereby hindering the diversity of thought and skills that drive competitive advantage. In the worst-case scenario, this approach can create a team lacking adaptability, fresh ideas, and varied problem-solving abilities.

Mitigating Mistakes: Effective Strategies for Balanced Hiring Decisions

While it’s challenging to eliminate biases and gut feel from the hiring process entirely, hiring managers can take several measures to ensure more balanced decisions. The following methods can help to achieve a fairer and more thorough assessment of candidates:

1. Utilise a Structured Interview Process

A structured interview, where each candidate is asked the same set of questions in the same order, helps reduce the influence of gut feel by ensuring that all candidates are evaluated on the same criteria. This approach minimises the impact of spontaneous questions that may give an advantage to charismatic or engaging candidates. Structured interviews have been shown to predict job performance more reliably than unstructured interviews, as they provide a consistent framework for evaluating each applicant.

2. Incorporate Behavioural and Situational Assessments

In addition to competency-based questions, using behavioural and situational assessments can reveal how candidates are likely to handle real-life challenges and their thought processes when solving problems. This allows the interviewer to observe how a candidate approaches unexpected scenarios and assesses adaptability. Presenting a case study or hypothetical problem relevant to the role allows hiring managers to gain insight into the candidate’s analytical skills, resilience, and ability to think under pressure.

3. Emphasise Values and Cultural Fit Beyond Personality

Cultural fit is often conflated with personality compatibility, but the two are not synonymous. Rather than hiring for personality traits alone, hiring managers should assess how well a candidate’s values align with the organisation’s mission, vision, and principles. Cultural fit should center around shared work ethics, attitudes toward teamwork, and respect for diversity. Emphasising values-based alignment helps prevent the trap of hiring people who may not add new strengths to the team.

4. Employ a Panel Interview Format

Using a panel interview format, where multiple interviewers from diverse backgrounds and functions participate in the assessment, can significantly reduce individual biases. Each panellist can offer a unique perspective on the candidate’s suitability, and the combined feedback often results in a more holistic and accurate evaluation. Panel interviews are particularly effective for curbing “halo effects” associated with attractiveness or charisma, as different interviewers will likely prioritise different aspects of the candidate’s responses.

5. Utilise Data-Driven Assessments and Tests

Many organisations now incorporate data-driven assessments, such as cognitive ability tests, personality inventories, and emotional intelligence assessments, as part of the hiring process. These tools provide objective insights into a candidate’s strengths, weaknesses, and potential fit for the role. While these assessments are not foolproof, they can add rigor to the decision-making process and help identify qualities that may not be apparent through interviews alone.

6. Seek Reference Checks that Go Beyond Verification

A thorough reference check can often reveal insights that an interview alone may not capture. When speaking with former colleagues or supervisors, ask about specific situations where the candidate demonstrated problem-solving skills, adaptability, and teamwork. This feedback can validate, or challenge impressions formed during the interview and help build a more complete picture of the candidate’s past performance and character.

7. Allow Gut Feel to Inform, Not Decide

Gut feel doesn’t have to be disregarded entirely; it’s often based on subtle cues and can play a part in final decision-making. However, it should be a secondary consideration, used to add nuance to an already solid, evidence-based hiring decision. To keep gut feel in check, interviewers should note their impressions but prioritise competency and data-driven insights over personal preference.

8. Encourage Feedback and Post-Hire Evaluations

After a new hire has been on board for six months to a year, conduct a post-hire evaluation to assess how well they’ve integrated and met performance expectations. This process provides valuable feedback for future hiring decisions and highlights any potential gaps in the interview process. Post-hire evaluations can reveal patterns, helping hiring managers understand which qualities and competencies truly align with long-term success in the organisation.

Striving for a Balanced Hiring Process

While hiring can never be 100% objective, organisations can create a structured, comprehensive, and balanced process that combines gut feel with factual evidence and rigorous assessment. By acknowledging the role of biases and ensuring they don’t override objective evaluations, hiring managers can make more informed, effective hiring decisions.

The most effective hiring processes incorporate both structured assessments and an element of human intuition, but never allow one to overshadow the other. “Gut feel” can lead us astray and so a balanced approach provides the best chance of hiring employees who are not only skilled but aligned with the company’s long-term vision, values, and goals.

Mark Geraghty

Partner

Executive Recruit Ltd

Web: www.executiverecruitment.co.uk

LinkedIn Business: www.dhirubhai.net/company/executive-recruit

Twitter: @Exec_Recruit