Remember: You're Hiring Them to Work for You, Not to Date You

Small Business Saturday - Remember: You're Hiring Them to Work for You, Not to Date You The content is good quality and useful content, Which is new is that you just never knew before that I know is that I actually have discovered. Prior to the unique. It is now near to enter destination Remember: You're Hiring Them to Work for You, Not to Date You. And the content associated with Small Business Saturday.

Do you know about - Remember: You're Hiring Them to Work for You, Not to Date You

Small Business Saturday! Again, for I know. Ready to share new things that are useful. You and your friends.

In an earlier narrative where I discussed the hiring of sales professionals, I stated that if you are a hiring employer with a lot of "pet peeves" when it comes to other people and their personalities then you need to be sure and take those factors into notice when production a hiring decision. My mental was that it's usually the small, seemingly insignificant foxes that spoil the vines. Remember Rob Schneider from Saturday Night Live, the annoying "Making copies!" geek? (That five-minute sketch gets on my nerves--I can't imagine listening to a guy like that on a daily basis.) In personal relationships, those things you notion were odd or funny (in an irritating sort of way) about your mate when you first met can ultimately come to be deal-breakers down the road. Until recently, I didn't see a lot of dissimilarity between personal and professional relationships.

What I said. It is not outcome that the real about Small Business Saturday. You look at this article for home elevators an individual wish to know is Small Business Saturday.

How is Remember: You're Hiring Them to Work for You, Not to Date You

We had a good read. For the benefit of yourself. Be sure to read to the end. I want you to get good knowledge from Small Business Saturday.

We've heard people say "Hey, nothing personal, it's just business," meaning that I can screw you in the boardroom but afterwards we can go have few drinks, laugh it up and you won't hold it against me that I made you look incompetent in order to cover my own backside (this pretty much sums up Donald Trump's "The Apprentice" in case you've never watched it). Personally, my powers of "compartmentalization" are not that advanced. I have a real qoute being friends with person I do not trust or respect. However, when production a hiring decision, should we evaluate job candidates using the same set of criteria we use to conclude either or not we want to be friends with someone? If we're talking about trust and respect, then absolutely--without question, but my touch in the recruiting business has shown that all too often candidates are being eliminated and even worse, determined for positions based on the hiring manager's insignificant, personal biases.

When I think back to the handful of employees that have been terminated at our firm over the years, what stands out in my mind are those characteristics that bothered me when we first met: the weird sense of humor, the lack of eye contact, the liberal interpretation of "business casual." Surprisingly enough, none of those factors weighed in my decision to fire them; it plainly came down to performance issues (or lack thereof). Now it could be argued that those small "personality flaws" (according to me) were the warning signs of future behavior. But I now comprehend that ignoring my gut instinct was not what led to the error in judgment. The bad hiring decisions were made because I chose to overlook the lack of documented touch and chose not to thoroughly study their track narrative plainly because I was desperate to fill the position. On the other hand I've hired and worked alongside many individuals over the years that have excelled in their positions and we've not had to be the best of friends for them to do so.

During a recent, exhaustive crusade for a business improvement Manager, a client eliminated a very suited candidate because he had, and I quote, "an uncomfortable laugh." What exactly is an uncomfortable laugh, I asked (I didn't recall "endearing laugh" as being part of the customary job description). "Nice guy, but I can foresee our clients being put off by the guy when he starts that laugh." Seriously? What about the fact that he's been in your industry, calling on the exact same prospects your business calls with a verifiable, documented narrative of success (with the W-2's to back it up) for the last 8 years? "Nah, let's keep looking." In hindsight, this assuredly should not have come as a surprise to me inspecting the fact that this particular candidate's disqualification was preceded by candidates who were removed from notice due to the following reasons: lack of excitability, a smoker's cough, a presumptuous attitude, too technical, over-qualified, over zealousness and overly inquisitive. Eight candidates, each one very suited and experienced; eight eliminations--and not a particular one based on the candidate's background or track narrative of performance. Had this been a contingent crusade I probably would have hung it up after the "smoker's cough" explanation, but this was a retained crusade and throughout the whole process the client insisted he was anxious to fill the role.

As an face recruiting consultant, I would like to believe (or at least hope) that every person involved in the hiring and decision-making process has the best interest of the business at heart and that they're not allowing their own personal agendas to work on their decision. For example, if a retiring administrative is involved in the process of identifying his successor my hope is that he would want to see the most suited candidate in the job, not the one that's going to make every person in the business long for the days of the old regime. And while this was not the situation with the client just described, the fact remains that this particular hiring employer bypassed numerous potentially needful employees because he located his own personal biases ahead of the company's objectives. I've talked to recruiters and hiring managers alike that say they can conclude either or not a candidate is a good fit for a particular position in the first five minutes of the face-to-face interview.

That may be true if the candidate's resume does not indicate a documented track narrative of success that would lend itself to the new position. So anything criteria the hiring manager/recruiter is using to evaluate the candidate against in those first five (apparently insightful) minutes doesn't make a dissimilarity to begin with. The interview itself was not warranted, so why did the hiring manager/recruiter even bother conducting the interview in the first place? It's most likely due to the fact that they are overlooking the lack of touch (possibly due to lack of available, suited candidates) in the hopes they'll find person with whom they immediately manufacture rapport and will feel clear that the candidate's personality and enthusiasm will make up for their lack of firsthand experience. Is it possible to find successful, long-term employees using this theory of evaluation? Sure, anything is possible, but if we're playing the percentages you stand a significantly best opening of securing a valuable, high-performing team member by focusing your concentration on their history of accomplishments rather than questioning their choice of black slacks with navy blue socks.

I hope you have new knowledge about Small Business Saturday. Where you possibly can offer use in your daily life. And most importantly, your reaction is Small Business Saturday.Read more.. my latest blog post Remember: You're Hiring Them to Work for You, Not to Date You. View Related articles related to Small Business Saturday. I Roll below. I actually have recommended my friends to assist share the Facebook Twitter Like Tweet. Can you share Remember: You're Hiring Them to Work for You, Not to Date You.