Maybe you have your hiring process all figured out.

Your interview process is streamlined and focused. You consistently attract qualified talent who quickly become successful new hires. Your hiring costs and turnover rates are super low. Your productivity and morale are super high.

Congratulations! You’re way ahead of the pack. Unfortunately, most companies struggle to make good hires. Studies show that only half of new hires succeed, from entry-level employees to upper management.

It’s puzzling since many companies seem to be doing everything right: detailed job descriptions, flexible employee packages with perks and benefits, and attentive onboarding processes. Why then the dismal success rates?

“Unconscious biases in the hiring process,” answers Al Robinette.

Al is the founder of Career Path Consulting and Development, a business and career consulting firm. One of his key services is helping companies remove biases and make successful hires. We spoke to him about his Job Benchmarking for Talent Selection process.

Hiring Biases

When faced with multiple candidates, why do recruiters choose one over the other?

Resume and experience play a big role, of course. But when two seemingly equal candidates interview for a job, how does the interviewer decide whom to hire?

Often, it comes down to gut feelings and instinct. And that’s where unconscious biases come in. Too often, instinct, by definition a subconscious process, reflects those hidden, ingrained prejudices:

• Experience bias towards a candidate who worked in a big-name company like Google or Amazon.
• Education bias towards a candidate because of an Ivy League or other prestigious education.
• Intelligence bias towards a candidate who interviews particularly well.
• Affinity bias towards a candidate with a shared experience like attending the same college or having the same hometown.
• Beauty bias towards a good-looking candidate.

Some of those factors may be genuinely relevant to the open position. Yet, they become biases when the recruiter subconsciously gives them exaggerated weight, leading to bad hiring decisions.

As we’ll see later, Al doesn’t completely dismiss instincts. However, they need to be backed by facts, including a deep understanding of a job’s requirements and the candidate’s traits.

Job Benchmarking for Talent Selection

Al explains that the solution to overcoming biases is data-driven job benchmarking for talent selection. He breaks down his process into five steps:

1. Identify - First, identify Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) within your company. These are the people who clearly understand why the job exists, how it fits into your company’s strategy, and what are its success metrics.
   
   
2. Define - Next, the SMEs meet to define, prioritize and weigh 3-5 accountabilities for the job.
   
   
3. Assess - Based on those accountabilities, the SMEs comprehensively assess the skills needed to complete the job. Those assessments become the Job Benchmark.
   
   
4. Validate - “This step is crucial,” says Al. Compare existing company talent to the Job Benchmark to validate the assessment results. This will also show potential areas of development within existing talent.
   
   
5. Execute - Now use the validated Job Benchmark to create on-target job interview questions and candidate assessments. You’ll compare each candidate’s results against the Job Benchmark to choose the objectively best hire.

Having a scientific method reduces the influence of biases. It leads to better-fit hires, who will ease into a new job with less stress and more productivity. However, there’s one last piece that many companies overlook.

The Missing Piece

In 2005, Leadership IQ released an oft-quoted study saying that 46% of new hires fail within 18 months. They had surveyed more than 5000 hiring managers, asking them not only HOW MANY hires failed but also WHY they failed.

And that’s where the survey got really interesting. Surprisingly, only 11% of new employees failed because they lacked the right technical skills. The other nearly 90% didn’t make it because of interpersonal skills:

• 26% couldn’t accept feedback
• 23% couldn’t understand and manage emotions
• 17% lacked the necessary motivation
• 15% had the wrong temperament for the job

The hiring managers were so focused on assessing candidates’ technical skills that they ignored behavioral skills. But as we see from the results, ignore those skills at your peril.

And that’s the final, crucial piece to job benchmarking: It MUST include behavioral skills. “Experience and skills can be gained over time, but the fundamental makeup of a person doesn’t change as easily,” says Al. “That’s why it’s critical to make sure the candidate’s natural behavior traits and driving forces align to the position and the company culture.”

Behavioral Science

Al’s Job Benchmarks cover 55 traits, and only 25 of them are skill competencies. The other 30 include behavioral traits, intrinsic motivators, and acumen indicators. Assessing these traits goes beyond the surface you see on a resume to understand how candidates will respond to the job and work environment:

• When solving a problem, will they be reflective or reactive?
• Do they work at a fast or steady pace?
• What is their preferred communication method?
• Are they strict rule followers or do they see multiple paths?
• How self-motivated are they?

These are just a few examples. Any job is best accomplished with a unique set of behaviors, motivators, and styles. Understanding the behaviors a job needs and then assessing candidates for those behaviors brings a company the most successful hires.

It also informs the onboarding process. For example, if a candidate fits the job well but scores low on self-motivation, a manager may schedule more frequent check-ins with that new employee.

The Pay-off

If job benchmarking seems like a lot of work, it’s because it is. But the pay-off is huge, saving a business time and resources for years to come.

Al sees the process as an investment. Its benefits go far beyond reducing turnover costs:

• Attract and retain the top candidates for your position.
• Save time and money with a streamlined hiring process.
• Legally defend your hiring decisions in case of a lawsuit.
• Benefit from happy employees, open to new training and learning opportunities.
• Improve your company’s productivity.
• Cut new employee ramp-up time in half.
• Create a positive candidate experience and employer brand.

Improving your hiring and onboarding process doesn’t only affect the new hires. It also saves the rest of your office from low morale and burnout. Job benchmarking improves the well-being of the entire team who previously contended with constant turnover, workload redistribution, and social changes.

And getting back to those gut feelings, after all the data and science, do they have a place? Yes, says Al.

He teaches his clients the 25-25-50 rule. When it comes to hiring, choose a candidate based on:

• 25% resume, experience, certifications, and other technical skills
• 25% behavioral science
• 50% gut feeling from meeting a candidate in person

“Hire a candidate based on a complete picture of how they match the job,” explains Al. “Job benchmarking allows you to align all three areas of experience, skills, and personal attributes.”