What is Wrong with Just Wanting to Hire the “Best” Candidate?

At the outset of consulting engagements intended to take better advantage of diverse talent, I sometimes hear senior leaders state that their company “just wants to hire the best candidate.” On interrogating that comment, I have found that “best” is often conflated with characteristics of the senior leadership team. For example, most team members may be graduates of Ivy League universities and prefer candidates with similar backgrounds. But it is doubtful that an Ivy League background in and of itself predicts superior performance.

Have you deconstructed what comprises the “best” candidates for various positions in your organization? Have you experienced any “aha” moments or surprises in identifying skill or value-based characteristics of the best talent? At least some companies are quite thoughtful about the recruiting process, as per these techniques outlined by Fast Company.

http://www.fastcompany.com/3034524/the-future-of-work/instead-of-butting-heads-how-hiring-managers-and-recruiters-can-work-toge

Do you use these forward-thinking tips in your recruiting?

by

Is Your Organization Treating Human Resources like Rodney Dangerfield?

I get no respect at all. When I was a kid, I lost my parents at the beach. I asked a lifeguard to help me find them. He said, “I don’t know kid, there are so many places they could hide.”

For those of us old enough to remember, Rodney Dangerfield’s comic routines were hilarious. The self-demeaning comedian regaled his audiences with tales of getting absolutely no respect, from anybody, in any area of his life.

But unfortunately for those who have to live through it, the theme of “no respect” is enacted frequently within work organizations. In political wrangling among functional areas for who has more power, resources, status, decision-making ability, etc., people can get lost in the shuffle—with those from historically disadvantaged identity groups (e.g., people of color) getting downright trampled.

In your organization, do double standards persist? That is, situations in which similar levels of performance result in different outcomes for the employee, depending on his or her status. Research finds that problematic performance from members of dominant groups is often forgiven, whereas similar performance from members of marginalized groups is subject to intense scrutiny and may be attributed to overall incompetence.

A savvy Human Resources department will be on the alert for such differential treatment and nip it in the bud. Whenever a business leader brings up a performance issue, it is HR’s job to advise the leader on the best way to handle the issue. However, overbearing business leaders may prefer to follow their own agendas and overrule HR’s recommendation, treating those from marginalized groups unduly harshly.   Senior leaders who consider the judgements of business leaders as superior to those of HR are either not letting HR do its job, or themselves have done a poor job in selecting the company’s HR team.

People matter. Allowing your talent to be treated like inanimate pieces to be pushed back and forth on a game board at the whim of business leaders results in low morale, lost productivity, regretted losses and–most destructive to the pocketbook of the organization and its reputational capital–lawsuits.

Senior leaders need to take a 10,000 foot view of their organization and give HR the respect this function deserves. In this way the organization has a chance of becoming a healthy environment, one that allows employees to thrive and develop to their potential—and one in which “I get no respect” is a comic punchline rather than a dismal reality.

by
,

Why Your HR and D&I Programs Are Ineffective: The Devil is in the Details

Several years back, my team and I did a content analysis of diversity and inclusion programs that were intended to positively affect career success of women of color.  On paper, they looked great.  For example, of 15 organizations we assessed, 14 stated, in writing, that they had programs incorporating managerial accountability for developing women of color.

However, when we surveyed the women of color in those organizations, we found that less than 20% believed that their managers were held at all accountable.

What happened?  Simple (or not so simple):  poor implementation.   Such problematic implementation exists through the current time, with many targets of D and I programs being dissatisfied with results.

Many practices are well-intentioned and may even be well-communicated.  But organizations are short-changing themselves if they do not examine, in a granular way, HOW programs are implemented and carried out.

HR and D&I practitioners can take a page from educational program assessment, which digs deep into implementation.  At the core of program assessment is  the concept of program integrity, defined  as the degree to which a program is implemented as originally planned.  Undergirding this principle are adherence indicators  that include program content, methods, and activities, and  quantity, which represents the amount of a provided service received by a participant, such as  frequency of interactions.

But most important to HR/D&I is quality of delivery.  This deals with the manner in which a practice or program is provided and includes commitment and interaction style.

For example, as another team and I discovered, women of color tend to have less trusting relationships with their managers than do majority women.  Much of this lack of trust can be traced to interaction styles between the manager and direct report.   Importantly, this lower trust leads women of color to have a greater intent to leave their employers.    Whatever the organizations we surveyed were doing regarding retention of women of color, it was falling apart at the manager–direct report level.

HR and D&I professionals need to learn from pitfalls, as well as share stories of successful implementation—whether it is grooming strategically-based champions across the company to role model and support a change effort; or following up on program commitment experienced by key players;  or holding in-depth discussions with managers–especially those in the “frozen middle” who are often resistant to D&I–as to the quality of interactions with their diverse employees.

In the meantime, I welcome a dialogue on what people are struggling with.  What are the pain points for your diversity and inclusion practices, and, more broadly, HR programs?

For more insight on implementation,  please see:

Dusenbury, L., Branningan, R., Falco, M., & Hansen, W.B. (2003).  A review of research on fidelity of implementation:  Implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings.  Health Education Research, 18, 237-256.

by