3. Rethinking quality of hire
Quality-of-hire is a tough metric. According to a LinkedIn report, only 36% of recruiters measure it, and a meagre 33% believe they’re doing it the right way.
We propose a better metric, one that can be used in place of quality-of-hire: Quality of hiring process. Of course, it’s not a like-for-like substitute, but remember: Better to use a metric you actually measure than one you don’t.
How do you measure quality of hiring process? By speed and equity, namely.
Speed is evidence of alignment between recruiters, hiring teams, departments, and by extension, entire companies. If your speed to candidate approval is improving, you know everyone agrees on what you’re looking for in a candidate. If everyone agrees, and you’re moving fast, you’re more likely to get the right people in before they go elsewhere.
Diversity in hiring is good for the world, but it’s also good for your business. Can you look at your hiring process and say, with definitive proof, that you’ve opened your funnel up to the widest possible talent pool? Are you properly accounting and adjusting for recruiter and hiring manager bias? Many companies are struggling to answer these two questions. Equity is a great indicator of a healthy, functional hiring process, but you may need more data to help you improve.
Hire for 60-80% skill fit
When you’re thinking about your speed-to-hire, remember this: Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. By hiring someone who has 60 to 80% of the skills you need, you’re picking someone most likely to be in the zone of proximal development (that is, they’re at the right intersection of potential and ability). Conversely, someone who has 100% of the skills you’re after is going to be really hard to find – and even if you do find them, they’re probably looking for the next role up.