Why going with your gut is not enough
All decisions are based on internal guides that we as executives have developed over the years. Generally, for a successful senior executive, this intuition or feeling usually has a sound basis. However, when it becomes the basis for employee selection, intuition is more risky.
A typical example could be as follows. A recently employed senior executive, with what appears to be a strongly relevant background, good references and who made the best impression during the interview process, is hired. However, six to nine months after employment, team conflicts have erupted around projects and responsibilities, bad feelings are taking hold and the work is not getting done. What went wrong? Why was this executive a poor fit despite all the qualifications?
Decision-making processes
Everyone, even a well trained specialist, is influenced by a host of factors. These range from systemic issues, such as pressure to complete the hiring, internal team dysfunction and intractable business problems. Although perhaps less obvious, many interviewers are also affected by temperature, weather and seasons.
Another big factor comes from the differences of style between decision-makers- the main polarities are between the more rational/analytical types and the truly intuitive types. Each style and approach has its implications and blind spots, which undermine the accuracy of decision-making.
Tools of the trade
Experienced executives develop a powerful set of tools (heuristics) to deal with the complexity of business decision-making. These tools allow them to make subtle judgments fairly swiftly and to be able to communicate these decisions. They also affect feelings about people with whom they meet. These heuristics can be misleading, especially in softer decision areas; for instance, when a candidate reminds the executive of someone with whom he/she worked successfully in the past.
Another risk in decision-making is attached to biases, both conscious and unconscious. We are often not aware of our biases; a typical bias for expatriate executives is the mistrust of 'local' nationals in Eastern Europe. This can create fear in the hiring process that leads to poor decision-making.
The specter of the communist past is also present in the influence of pattern recognition on decision-making. Any expatriate with substantial experience in Poland sees this influence. Clearly, experience becomes an important element of the decision-making process; recognizing previous patterns and general success patterns is crucial for many senior executives.
Successful hiring
One of the key elements that differentiates a strong senior executive from his/her colleagues is his/her decision-making process in hiring. The best chief executives see employment decisions as intentional and a process. They especially recognize that senior management hiring decisions have a greater risk than lower management recruitments (because of the much greater complexity of the managerial and business situations senior executives face).
To address this, the best executives do the following:
Understand a decision as a process that cannot be pressured. They guide this process with subordinates and peers, allowing themselves to be influenced on the one hand, but recognizing their core needs on the other. They understand that being decisive does not mean short-changing the decision process.
They utilize modern HR tools, especially in terms of training and education. They are also willing to seek advice from the outside in key hiring decisions.
They know that knowledge is important and that this begins with self-knowledge. High self-awareness is almost as important as a high emotional intelligence among successful senior executives-they know their own biases and can control them. They understand the relationship between their experience and current business situation. This approach also supports these executives in attracting the best talent when they need it.
They know that teamwork and multiple interviewing steps support a hiring process.
They value the input of others, also of others with a different style and approach.
A typical example could be as follows. A recently employed senior executive, with what appears to be a strongly relevant background, good references and who made the best impression during the interview process, is hired. However, six to nine months after employment, team conflicts have erupted around projects and responsibilities, bad feelings are taking hold and the work is not getting done. What went wrong? Why was this executive a poor fit despite all the qualifications?
Decision-making processes
Everyone, even a well trained specialist, is influenced by a host of factors. These range from systemic issues, such as pressure to complete the hiring, internal team dysfunction and intractable business problems. Although perhaps less obvious, many interviewers are also affected by temperature, weather and seasons.
Another big factor comes from the differences of style between decision-makers- the main polarities are between the more rational/analytical types and the truly intuitive types. Each style and approach has its implications and blind spots, which undermine the accuracy of decision-making.
Tools of the trade
Experienced executives develop a powerful set of tools (heuristics) to deal with the complexity of business decision-making. These tools allow them to make subtle judgments fairly swiftly and to be able to communicate these decisions. They also affect feelings about people with whom they meet. These heuristics can be misleading, especially in softer decision areas; for instance, when a candidate reminds the executive of someone with whom he/she worked successfully in the past.
Another risk in decision-making is attached to biases, both conscious and unconscious. We are often not aware of our biases; a typical bias for expatriate executives is the mistrust of 'local' nationals in Eastern Europe. This can create fear in the hiring process that leads to poor decision-making.
The specter of the communist past is also present in the influence of pattern recognition on decision-making. Any expatriate with substantial experience in Poland sees this influence. Clearly, experience becomes an important element of the decision-making process; recognizing previous patterns and general success patterns is crucial for many senior executives.
Successful hiring
One of the key elements that differentiates a strong senior executive from his/her colleagues is his/her decision-making process in hiring. The best chief executives see employment decisions as intentional and a process. They especially recognize that senior management hiring decisions have a greater risk than lower management recruitments (because of the much greater complexity of the managerial and business situations senior executives face).
To address this, the best executives do the following:
Understand a decision as a process that cannot be pressured. They guide this process with subordinates and peers, allowing themselves to be influenced on the one hand, but recognizing their core needs on the other. They understand that being decisive does not mean short-changing the decision process.
They utilize modern HR tools, especially in terms of training and education. They are also willing to seek advice from the outside in key hiring decisions.
They know that knowledge is important and that this begins with self-knowledge. High self-awareness is almost as important as a high emotional intelligence among successful senior executives-they know their own biases and can control them. They understand the relationship between their experience and current business situation. This approach also supports these executives in attracting the best talent when they need it.
They know that teamwork and multiple interviewing steps support a hiring process.
They value the input of others, also of others with a different style and approach.
