5 Reasons For a Good Shorter Process of Interview

 

 

The time it takes to fill an open vacancy is rising. Research conducted by CEB last year for the Recruitment & Employment Confederation indicated that average time to hire had increased by 26 days over the last 5 years, yet there was no corresponding increase in quality of hire approval ratings for the same period. We are taking longer but not necessarily hiring better-matched employees.

There were similar findings from a Glassdoor study late last year, which also concluded that vacancies in the UK can take up to 9 days longer to fill than those in the US. The Glassdoor analysis gives us some clues as to why this is happening. Having studied nearly 350,000 interview reviews on their site they could see that it is the length of the interview process that has been increasing. Some of this can be down to the extra layers of screening that many companies now use – such as skills testing, group interviews, competency and behavioural questions, and culture matching – whilst another major factor is the growing number of stakeholders now involved in the process.
There has always been a trade-off between finding the best fit and risking lost productivity from having a role unfilled. As knowledge sector roles grow and evolve, we are hiring for a more complex mix of skills, judgement and insights that may require greater layers of screening in order to find the perfectly matched candidate. However whilst the hiring manager’s search for best fit might involve a longer process, the impact on the job seeker is rarely considered. For them, the investment of time in preparation and travel, plus the need to take time off from their current role, has to feel justified or else they may conclude that their prospective employer is indecisive, or worse, doesn’t know what they are looking for.
With some hires, this might be the case. If we are trying to find people that we haven’t recruited before, to do roles that have just been created, then it isn’t always obvious how best to assess them. We have more tools available too. Video interviewing 6is increasingly used at the first stage for screening, and later in the process can help bring in stakeholders who are in different locations and countries. Some hiring managers will look to past performance and use behavioural interviews while others might prefer to assess future performance with competency questions. And we have digital gaming to see how candidates respond to problem situations.
There’s also culture matching. The recent US launch of Elevated Careers – a job matching platform that pairs job seekers with companies based on culture, work values and knowledge – from eHarmony, a dating site with a history of successful person-to-person matching, may point a way forward. A UK launch is planned.
Having extra layers of screening and assessment shouldn’t mean that we use them all. Hiring managers need to focus on which are most relevant and focus on the most effective structure. Using too many will just lengthen the interview process. There are many reasons why this is not a good idea, and here are 5 that hiring managers should be aware of:
Slow hiring doesn’t improve quality
We saw this from the research quoted earlier and there’s a reason. The best, most in-demand candidates won’t wait. They may either join a business that has made a faster decision, or lose interest in an indecisive manager. If the quality of the shortlist drops, then a weaker candidate may get appointed.
Employer brand can be damaged
Candidates form opinions based on their experiences of the application process. If the business seems indecisive, slow or bureaucratic then they are likely to have negative perceptions of them as a place to work. This can also have a negative impact on applications for future vacancies.
Internal morale can be affected
Particularly in those teams that will form the central relationships for the new hire. They want someone in place, the open role may be impacting their own ability to perform well, which can have consequences. Those who have joined from organisations that make faster decisions might also be having second thoughts.


There are hidden costs
These can arise from lower productivity and calling upon short term contract cover. And most importantly from the time invested by recruiters, managers, HR and colleagues, that is diverted away their day job. They are all involved in the interview process and will give input to the final decision.
Customers and clients will notice
If roles in customer facing, service oriented teams are vacant for a long time then the quality can drop. Whether current employees are working extra hours, or some projects and delivery schedules are delayed, there is bound to be an impact on goods and service.
Job seekers usually say that the most important interview they have, the one that most contributes to their decision, is the final one with their potential manager. We need to make sure that they haven’t lost interest in the role before they get there.