“Well, Beth, I just don’t know. I just didn’t get that gut feeling about the candidate,” the hiring manager said. I teach behavioral interviewing skills to my hiring managers, on a consistent basis. This manager has yet to attend one of my classes. It was Friday afternoon, and all I could think of was myself on the stand, defending this hiring manager’s gut. “Wow, you know what, Mr. Hiring Manager?” I thought. “It’s an interview, not a date. Your gut is irrelevant.” That’s when it hit me. Let’s call it what it is. An interview is a first date. It’s a courtship to determine whether both parties would consider making a commitment to each other. The sizing up, the smiling, the nodding, the personal questions, the best foot forward ó essentially, both parties present their best, in hopes that the other party will be enticed. It’s biology at its finest. We’re working against millions of years of hard-wiring here, folks. We are equipped with cognitive boxes that guide our impressions, making people appear much more consistent than they are. Female birds choose the most brightly colored male they can find when it’s time “to interview.” (Coincidently, so do sales managers, but I digress)? It’s biology, as Dr. Wendell Williams eludes to in an ERE article from March 2001, when he says its “in our genes.” The trouble with introducing biology into the interviewing process (i.e., “gut feelings”) is that gut feelings enter the gut via the cerebrum. And the EEOC doesn’t care about your brain or your gut. While candidates are on their best behavior, hiring managers are busy looking for ways to justify their 30-second opinion of the candidate. Nemesis and antithesis of effective interviewing, thy name is Halo! The Halo Effect “Halo,” by loose definition, is a complete positive impression formed quickly about a person (first date or first interview, it doesn’t matter which) based on initial positive characteristics. It involves jumping to conclusions: beautiful = good, tall = competent. You get the idea. Immortalized in article after article, the halo effect is associated with rater bias ó thus it’s the application to interviewing. In the 1920s, Edward Thorndike asked army officers to rate their subordinates in intelligence, physique, leadership and character, without the benefit of conversation with any of them. What do you know, the taller, the more culturally attractive, etc., were rated as the “superior soldiers” and the more “intelligent of the bunch.” There is some argument to the self-fulfilling prophecy of this scenario (Aronson, 1990), but its beyond the scope of this article. In 1946, Solomon Asch detailed “impression formation.” Briefly, the product of a person’s perception is a unified impression. In other words, impressions go beyond the information given. We readily build an elaborate personality, assigning traits and work ethic, from little more than a 30-second meeting. But even knowing this, we can’t stop it. Think I’m kidding? It’s extremely profitable. The nature of marketing is halo. It’s at the heart of all brand imaging. Mr. Brilliant Basketball Player and all-around nice guy drinks Brand X soda. Brand X soda must be good. You buy Brand X soda. It works to the tune of millions of dollars paid to athletes, movie stars, singers, and others. And we justify this all in less than 30 seconds. As it turns out, questions surface concerning Mr. Brilliant Basketball Player’s nice guy image. Suddenly, no one wants Brand X soda associated with Mr. Brilliant Basketball Player’s image, and he’s out a couple million. Halo, my friends. The only anecdote to human nature is knowledge. Knowledge is transferred in the corporate environment (we hope) by training. Numerous studies have shown training can reduce rater error in interviewing situations (Latham, Eexley and Purcell, 1975). Given the costs associated with poor hiring decisions and turnover (roughly, double the salary plus benefits) we owe it to our bottom lines to make as good a hiring decision as possible. The appropriate training to aid us in the defense of our nature already exists. It’s behavioral interviewing. Behavioral Interviewing Don’t roll your eyes! If you are an ERE reader on a regular basis, you know it’s a common mantra. Forty percent of Fortune 500 companies use behavior-based interviewing. (Bell, 02). They do this because it reduces rater bias, plain and simple. As with most things in human nature, halo can be used for good or evil. While we are fighting diligently against our nature, the tall candidates on the other side of the table are working to indulge it. IM (impression management) is a business (Journal of Management, Jan 02). IM is defined as an “attempt to portray a particular (positive) image of oneself to a target person” (Schlenker, 1980). Candidates who lull us into making a positive decision on their behalf use these tactics. Social exchange (or extraversion and agreeableness), the appearance of candidate similarity to the interviewer (“oh, you play golf, too?”) and nonverbal cues, such as nodding and smiling, are used to win the job. An ACAP counselor suggests practicing your body language in front of a full-length mirror. A college website details “tools” to win the position, including mirroring the behaviors and movements of the recruiter. Speaking at the same rate of speed and moving in a manner similar to the recruiter are suggested. (By the way, if you’ve ever been in an interview like this, I have one word for you: creepy.) There’s even a book, “The Halo Effect: How Volunteering Can Lead to a More Fulfilling Life and a Better Career.” In it, the author (who is, by the way, a recruiter) suggests how volunteering can advance your career by demonstrating how charitable you are. If you show similar interests as the interviewing manager, more the better (this must be why people keep telling me about their scouting troop). Even cross culturally this phenomenon is discussed. The Hindu, India’s largest newspaper, ran an article recently telling interviewing readers how to dress, shake hands, and sit. “When your visual message is positive,” the article stated, “the person you’ve just met will tend to assume that all other aspects or you are equally positive.” News flash: Candidates lie. Candidates are Machiavellian (morality is irrelevant, in obtaining power or the desired objective), especially in this economy. And the higher up the food chain you go, the more belligerent it becomes. Behavioral interviewing will reduce your applicant’s faking. Its tough to lie in a behavioral interview. If you don’t believe me, give me a call and we’ll conduct one. As Lou Adler has mentioned on a variety of occasions, it’s not perfect, but it’s the best solution we have. Don’t introduce more error, or succumb to the well-thought-out dance of a candidate. Remember, you’re dealing with biology here. Hiring managers and candidates will manipulate you, if they can. Making yourself aware of this by involving yourself in behavioral interviewing will prepare you for this interaction. (Plus, you can use it on a date, but that’s another article.) I realize you’re emotionally attached to interviewing, even though it’s the worst possible method to choose new hires. But ignore your gut and ask candidates about a specific situation, for the love of Pete! “Most people hire people they like, rather than the most competent person. Research shows that most decision-makers make their hiring decisions in the first five minutes of an interview and spend the rest of the interview rationalizing their choice.” ó Orv Owens, Psychologist, NYT.
Hundreds of tech hiring teams have halted their standard hiring processes in favor of remote interviewing, sourcing and screening, which can directly impact the candidate experience. Download this guide to see how the best-in-class teams approach remote tech hiring in a dynamic, candidate-centric market.