Which HR tools are best for selecting the right employees?

  Recruiting the right staff can make all the difference for an organization. Organizations are also more focused than ever on retaining their top talent. Recruitment is a profession in its own right. We regularly receive questions about the recruitment process. For example: What recruitment methods do you use, and which ones yield the best results? For example, what do you do with a 38-year-old prospective employee who was unemployed for over a year during the economic crisis, comes across as somewhat headstrong, but scored the highest of all applicants on an intelligence test? In this article:

• The Resume
• The First Interview
• Structured interview
• Predictive validity

 

1. At the Start of the Selection Process-The Resume

[ps2id id='the-resume' target=''/] The curriculum vitae (resume) has traditionally been the first screening tool recruiters use to separate the wheat from the chaff. However, things often go wrong right at the start of the selection process. Recruiters are sometimes more easily swayed by a photo or a candidate’s name than by the relevant information on the resume. A study by CVster shows that attractive applicants are invited for an interview much more often than less attractive ones. By sending out about 300 nearly identical resumes from two fictional (attractive and less attractive) male and female applicants, the study found that 43% of the attractive applicants received a positive response, compared to 15% of the less attractive ones. A similar study was conducted regarding the applicants’ backgrounds. A total of 480 nearly identical cover letters were sent to companies in various industries. Of the four senders, three had names that did not sound Dutch. Email tracking software was used to determine whether the emails were opened and whether they received a response. It turned out that emails from applicants with Dutch-sounding names were opened more often and received positive responses more frequently. While the resume may serve as the applicant’s calling card, whether it is also a reliable tool for selecting new employees is a matter of debate.

2. A cup of coffee? The first interview

[ps2id id='first-interview' target=''/] Would you like a cup of coffee? How many times has that question been asked at the start of a job interview? It’s an ideal icebreaker and is meant to put the candidate at ease. As the inventors of the concept of “gezellig” (coziness), we in the Netherlands generally consider the “gezellig” factor an important part of the hiring process. In many organizations, interviewers therefore see it primarily as their task to put candidates at ease and have a “gezellig” conversation over coffee that focuses on personal questions. The fact that “a cup of coffee, tea, or something else?” is an important topic is also evident from how frequently it appears on websites that offer advice to job seekers. “Say no to coffee” is the first of 10 tips the site Hi-Re gives its readers. The Monsterboard website also addresses the topic of “drinking coffee.” The advice is that water is the safest option. “You can burn your mouth on coffee or tea, and when you’re nervous, there’s a high chance of spilling it.”

Candidate experience

Incidentally, there’s absolutely nothing wrong with creating a friendly atmosphere during a job interview. Whether or not the applicant turns out to be the right candidate, it can’t hurt if they feel positive about the hiring process. Negative experiences among applicants can have unexpected consequences. They tell friends and family, complain about the potential employer on social media, and-more than once-decide to stop purchasing products or services from the company they applied to. This happened to a major organization like Virgin. The negative experiences of job applicants cost the company about 5 million in revenue!

Optimal Job Application Experience

Recruitment management took action and established a “gold standard interview program.” From then on, candidates could count on an optimal job application experience. Among other things, this meant that the interviewer had to approach the applicant in a positive manner. From then on, everyone was also given a constructive explanation of why they were not a good fit for a particular position. In addition, rejected candidates received free advice on how they could improve certain aspects of their application. This transformation in the candidate experience quickly paid off. Not only did it result in significantly more satisfied candidates, but it also led to a reduction in recruitment and selection costs and an increase in the number of clients.

Freestyling During an Unstructured Job Interview

The job interview is undoubtedly one of the most commonly used selection methods when recruiting new staff. During a traditional interview, candidates often “freestyle.” The term “freestyling” comes from hip-hop and refers to the way rappers spontaneously complement (or contradict) each other and come up with lyrics on the spot. In an unstructured interview-as it’s called in professional jargon-the process is actually quite similar. The direction the conversation will take isn’t determined in advance. There’s hardly any structure to speak of. The conversation develops primarily based on the candidate’s answers. The interviewer builds on these responses. If you have five candidates visiting, this often results in five different conversations. How do you determine who the best candidate is based on such interviews? Do you rely purely on intuition, experience, or biases, or do rational considerations and measurable factors also play a role?

Insight into the person

Of course, an interview like this-which takes place in a seemingly informal atmosphere and focuses primarily on personal questions-has its advantages. After all, when you’re hiring a new employee, you want to know what kind of person you’re bringing on board, what motivates them, and whether they’ll be a good fit for the organization. Precisely because of the relaxed atmosphere, there’s a good chance the candidate will reveal more about themselves. You get a better sense of their personality. At least, that’s what you’d expect.

Reliability

“Tell me a little about yourself” is therefore a commonly used opening question. Of course, that question isn’t meant to find out why the candidate loves coffee so much, is an Ajax fan, or spends their free time in nature. Above all, you want to know more about their motivation and why this applicant believes they’re the right person for the open position. Most applicants-provided they’ve prepared well-know that when asked such a question, they should enthusiastically talk about their passions and talents and weave this into their answer in a way that makes it perfectly clear why they’re a great fit for the job. One of the sites mentioned earlier even advises: “Don’t talk about yourself.” With a question like this, you can go in any direction-it offers plenty of opportunities-and you should take advantage of that by using your knowledge and experiences to immediately make it clear why the position is a perfect fit for you. In short, how reliable is the answer? How do you see through the smooth talk?

Assessments: Personality Tests

In addition to the personal interview, a personality test can provide organizations with greater clarity on how the candidate’s personality profile translates into their knowledge, skills, and behavior. In such a test, candidates are presented with a list of about 150 questions. The test bases the candidate’s scores on openness, extraversion, neuroticism, agreeableness, and conscientiousness. Together, these form the five most important personality factors for behavior in work situations. Competencies such as leadership, entrepreneurship, customer-friendliness, or helpfulness can be better assessed using such a personality test.

3. Structured Interview

[ps2id id='interview' target=''/] In a structured job interview, the direction of the interview is determined in advance. The interviewer has carefully considered the criteria against which a candidate will be evaluated. The candidate must fit a predefined job profile. Knowledge, expertise, and professional competence are qualities that can be measured against specific standards. Standards and scores are therefore established for all questions. This prevents misunderstandings about who receives a positive or negative evaluation. All candidates are evaluated based on the same questions, criteria, and standards. This significantly reduces the likelihood of subjective judgments-such as first impressions, the halo effect—where you’re “charmed” by a single positive trait of the candidate-or the opposite, the horn effect—where a single negative trait ruins the potential employee’s chances-will play a decisive role in selecting the right candidate.

Higher predictive value

In other words, the reliability of a structured interview is significantly higher than that of the unstructured version and is a better method for predicting job performance. This is also confirmed by the study “Personnel Selection in the Netherlands,” conducted by the staffing agency Yacht in collaboration with the University of Amsterdam.

Characteristics of a Good Interview

In practice, organizations often underestimate the impact of well-prepared and structured interviews. The “coffee chat” is still a widely used method, even though its results are significantly less effective when it comes to selecting the right person for the right position. Only 25 to 38% of hired employees are still performing successfully and to the employer’s satisfaction after one year. With structured interviews, that figure rises to 50% of new employees. According to the study, interviews are therefore only a useful selection tool when they meet four key criteria.

• Well-prepared and targeted questions regarding the most important job requirements
• Specific questions about concrete behavior in the past, present, and future, designed to ensure that a candidate cannot get away with just smooth talk.
• The same questions for everyone
• The use of a scoring method

 

The right selection method is important

The study confirms, as we also saw in the Virgin example, that choosing the right selection methods influences the ability to attract quality staff. When applicants are treated unfairly, unpleasantly, or indifferently, it has a negative impact on the pool of new applicants. The study further shows that, in addition to structured interviews-in which the questions are SMART (specific, measurable, acceptable, realistic, and time-bound)—aptitude tests and demonstrable work performance also have a higher predictive value.

Effectiveness of Staff Selection Rarely Measured

Only 20 percent of Dutch organizations measure the effectiveness of their recruitment process, according to the University of Amsterdam (UVA) study. Fifty percent of organizations do provide feedback and ask applicants what they thought of the selection process. However, this feedback can only be partially trusted because it is unclear to what extent applicants are being completely honest. Recruiters often rely on their gut feeling and, in many cases, on unstructured interviews. In doing so, they overlook the added value of a structured selection process in which candidates are compared based on an objective scoring system.

Greater Focus on Mental Capacity and Broader Versatility

One of the recommendations emerging from the study is that recruiters should pay more attention to a candidate’s mental capacity and broader versatility. According to the researchers, too much emphasis is placed on specific knowledge and skills. While this is undoubtedly useful for well-defined roles, it is less effective in a dynamic work environment where knowledge and skills must be continuously developed. The researchers believe that the selection methods used in the United States-which place much greater emphasis on a candidate’s personality and intelligence-should serve as a model.

4. Predictive Validity - Schmidt & Hunter

[ps2id id='validity' target=''/] To predict whether you are hiring the right employee-one who will not only perform satisfactorily but will also still be with your organization a year from now-interviews (whether structured or not) are usually insufficient. There are other selection methods that influence the prediction of employees’ future performance. An economic factor also plays a role in attracting the best employees. For example, in their 1998 study “The Validity and Utility of Selection Methods in Personnel Psychology,” Schmidt & Hunter demonstrated that the level of employee performance can vary quite significantly. For example, an average employee might perform up to 40% worse than a high-performing employee. Carefully selecting potential employees can therefore yield significant economic benefits for a company. Schmidt and Hunter analyzed 85 years of research on selection methods. In their meta-analysis, the concept of predictive validity plays a key role. It describes the extent to which you can predict something. This applies not only to future events (prediction) but also to the present or past.

Combining Testing Methods

Schmidt and Hunter believe that assessments such as intelligence tests-also known as cognitive ability tests—are a reliable means of predicting job performance. It scores 0.51 on a scale from 0 to 1. However, when intelligence testing is combined with a structured interview, the predictive value increases to 0.63. Even unstructured interviews, which score relatively low, benefit from being combined with an intelligence or ability test. The predictive validity increases significantly from 0.38 to 0.55. The predictive validity also increases when combined with a work trial or practical simulation. It is precisely by combining different selection methods that the best results are achieved.

What do we do with that 38-year-old, headstrong candidate?

“What do you do with a 38-year-old potential employee who was unemployed for over a year during the economic crisis, comes across as somewhat headstrong, but scores the highest on an intelligence test out of all the applicants?” we asked ourselves at the beginning of this article. Let’s take a closer look at his hiring process as we wrap up. During the traditional, unstructured interview, this person had to contend with an interviewer who had already raised concerns beforehand about the fact that the candidate had been out of the workforce for over a year. The interviewer was also put off by the candidate’s tone, even though the candidate excelled at giving smart, well-thought-out answers. This is a classic example of the Horn effect.

Added Value of an Intelligence Test

This candidate would have had no chance from the outset if the hiring process had consisted solely of an interview. However, by scoring the highest on the intelligence test, it caught the interviewer’s attention. Various studies show that the reliability and predictive power of intelligence tests are high. The test revealed that this person possesses many cognitive skills, which are very important today and usually provide organizations with economic added value. This person is able to process information quickly and knows how to immediately link it to existing knowledge. The intelligent employee can analyze and solve problems and does not shy away from complexity. This benefits productivity. A complex, dynamic environment where quick adaptation is a requirement calls for an employee with a broad range of cognitive skills. Thanks to the added value of a selection tool such as the intelligence test, this person could be properly assessed and hired as an employee.

Frequently Asked Questions:

• As an HR manager, how can you strike a balance between structured and unstructured interviews to achieve the best results?
  • Combining both interview methods can be effective by supplementing structured questions with informal conversations, ensuring that both objective criteria and personal insights are taken into account.
• What specific tools or software can improve the accuracy of the selection process?
  • There are advanced HR software packages available that use AI and data analysis to improve the accuracy and efficiency of the selection process. Examples include applicant tracking systems (ATS) and assessment tools.
• How can you address potential biases in the selection process, especially when using traditional methods?
  • Implementing training on unbiased hiring, using anonymous resumes, and standardizing interview questions can help minimize bias.

The Recruitment Process in Your Organization

Would you like to review and further refine the recruitment process in your organization? Feel free to contact one of our consultants. They can answer questions about the recruitment process and help you implement it effectively.