Hiring national or international staff locally can be something of a lottery. Half the time, you will hire someone who excels in the job and makes you look good. But the other half of the time, you will hire someone who lets you down two months later and makes you look bad. You can improve the odds by being ruthless when short-listing candidates for interview on the strength of their CV’s (curriculum vitae). Look neither at age nor gender, but only at the degree to which their qualifications and experience match the specifications of the job. Prior to interviewing, ask the candidates to send an example of their recent work. Read this, and be prepared to quiz the candidate, not on the contents as such but on why and how it was written.
The purpose of the interview is to ascertain why short-listed candidates really left their past positions, whether they really did what they say they did, judge their flexibility and willingness to work beyond the basic job description, their attitudes to your authority, and whether you think they will fit within your current management structure. Interviews are only useful if they get behind a participant’s experiences. This is achieved by pursuing in-depth information around a topic by asking pre-formulated yet open-ended questions (the same open-ended questions are asked to all), with respondents free to choose how to answer the question. This approach facilitates faster interviews that can be more easily analyzed and compared. In terms of process:
In terms of the questions to be asked, note the difference between fact and opinion in the responses, and pose them in terms of past, present or future. In terms of sequence:
In terms of hints for interviewers:
For the person being interviewed, more and more Human Resources departments are hiring people who “give good interview” rather than those who have the best technical qualifications or experience. This trend is giving rise to a risk-averse culture within organisations which appears to be accelerating. Mostly, this is the result of questions being posed which focus on ‘core competencies’ such as ‘leadership’ and ‘challenges faced’ rather than demonstrable evidence of outcome that positively affects the bottom line.
A typical interview follows a predictable pattern:
Unless you are closing down a programme — in which case everyone is losing their job — firing an individual for poor performance is unpleasant for all concerned. Such an event should not take place without there first having been two formal notifications: the first oral, the second in writing. The latter should have involved written appraisal against expected and agreed deliverables.
Let the employee know (s)he is not being let go for incompetence, but because his or her particular skills no longer fit this programme or organization at this time.
This having been done, politely point out where the employee in question has failed to deliver and ask them for any comments in each case. Always make it clear that the employee is not being let go for incompetence, but because he or she has particular skills that don’t anymore fit this programme or organization at this time. Make it clear whether or not you will be supplying a reference. As with hiring, when conducting these interviews always have another person with you. At least one person should be female. This prevents later allegations of ‘abuse of position’ or even ‘sexual harassment’. When letting drivers or warehouse staff ‘go’, make sure that all car keys are accounted for and that they are escorted off the premises.
This is is a section from Clusterwise 2. Reproduction is encouraged. It would be nice if the author,
James Shepherd-Barron, and clustercoordination.org were acknowledged when doing so.
http://james.shepherd-barron.com/clusterwise-2/35-administration/