Get Started for FREE
Sign up with Facebook Sign up with Twitter
I don't have a Facebook or a Twitter account
 Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scoop.it!
Quality of hire is one of the most important, but misunderstood recruiting metrics, we’ll show you how to use it properly. 
No comment yet.
Sign up to comment
Scoop.it!
Barry Deutsch's insight:
Great article at HBR about balancing getting great results while raising employee engagement concurrently. The very best managers and executives are able to walk this fine line.
|
Scoop.it!
"You’re probably thinking – how could Barry make such an outrageous statement? Over-paid – are you kidding? Ugh! I’m actually under-paid."
Barry Deutsch's insight:
You're grossly over-paid if 50% of what you do on a daily basis is the work you're team should be doing. Why do you tolerate anything less than outstanding performance by your team members?
|
I am a huge proponent of metrics and KPIs. I like the idea of measuring quality of hire. However, everyone gets all tangled up in how to measure it.
Here is my recommendation: Take your SUCCESS FACTORS (assuming you did these before the hire), and then measure the person's delivery on those outcomes, expectations, results, performance, metrics, and KPIs at 90 days and 6 months. Did they hit them, exceed them, or miss them.
I would define quality of hire as a candidate who hits or exceeds your specific quantifiable outcomes at the 90 day or 6 month timeframe with a set of behaviors and style that is consistent with your organizational culture and values.
Over 50% of newly hired employees fail to meet this expectation. Most hiring managers don't make a signficant change by firing the person, putting a PIP together, or having a deep developmental program to improve performance or behavior. They just accept partially competent people, or take those elements off the plate that the employee can't do - and the manager does it by allowing the monkey to be transferred onto their back. Doesn't that sound dysfunctional?