The Missing Measurement of Performance
We measure everything today — primarily because we can.
Take this one. How many adults aged 18-29 got their news from the Jon Stewart show compared to the evening news ? 13% compared to 10%. See what I mean?
But, if you are in the recruiting business, there is one measurement notably absent: the post-hire performance of a candidate.
An interesting article by blogger Eric Putkonen earlier this week addresses the issue of improving the quality of hire. His starting point comes from Peter Drucker.
“If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it”
No-one seems to have formalized a process to measure the performance of a newly hired manager or executive. We expect to hear if a person underperforms and often we will know if he or she overperforms.
But the concept of a structured, ongoing review process by which to measure the success of the recruitment doesn’t seem to exist.
So, if we are not measuring it, how can we manage it to the point where we can claim to provide superior candidates for a given position?
Recruiters who claim to find and engage superior candidates should have data to back it up. That means initiating and maintaining a consistent, uniform process of grading workplace performance for a period of up to 2-3 years.
Putkonen takes Deloitte’s 4-question performance review and adds three of his own to create a five-minute Quality of Hire survey.
It’s not a performance review and it’s not seen by the employee or anyone else except the recruiter.
Presumably, the process would be to obtain buy-in in advance from both the new hire and the employer.
You can review Putkonen’s seven questions here, as well as some interesting knowledge such data can provide.
via. Recruiting Blogs