How to choose the right person for the job when you're not really sure who's best
If you use emotional intelligence analysis as part of your recruitment process, it will
save you from costly mistakes, and allow you to identify the strongest candidate even
when traditional interview techniques have not shown a clear winner.
You could even replicate (at extremely low cost) an internal study that saved the US
Airforce $2.7 million in 1996, and use it to make your section or company the best
recruiter in your field.
To help you do this, we set out below two checklists for using emotional intelligence
analysis in your recruitment process, two detailed case studies of selection choices
which were influenced by emotional intelligence analysis, and the details of how the
US Airforce made such massive savings.
You can use emotional intelligence analysis in your recruitment process on two levels
– with the candidates, and with the interviewing panel themselves.
1: Working with the candidates:
•
All candidates put forward for significant roles should have average or above
Emotional Intelligence (aka EI or EQ).
•
Bar-On EQi is the most psychometrically robust measure of emotional
intelligence currently available.
•
Short-listed candidates should complete the Bar-On EQi to provide a level of
detail which takes into account the specific competencies needed for the job.
•
The EQi assessment can also include analysis of any specific skill sets needed
to fit into an established team and company culture.
•
The assessment can also highlight any danger zones, or areas which may
require some careful probing in the questions at a second interview.
•
Profiling two candidates and comparing their EQi assessments can be
illuminating because it challenges your preconceptions.
•
Comparing EQi assessment results against the Star Profile (see below) for that
job can ensure that the candidates’ competencies are being matched to the job
requirements.
2: Working with the interviewing panel:
•
It is vital for interviewers to be aware of the importance of EQ in recruitment
decisions.
•
EQ is the most significant factor in the success of any candidate you recruit for
your organisation.
•
Becoming aware of their own emotional intelligence can help interviewers
enormously in their decision-making. Understanding how they might be
‘recruiting in their own image’, as opposed to identifying what is really
needed for the team, can help them to make better-informed choices.
•
Star Performers (see below) will have specific EQ competency advantages;
becoming aware of the emotional competencies needed for the role will give
interviewing panels a serious advantage.
•
Interviewing panels need to be aware of and challenge any prejudices and
assumptions which may be influencing their decisions unconsciously; doing
this in a non-threatening, non-shaming way will help overcome these issues.
•
Being in possession of a clear-and-concise, tried-and-tested, 25 year old, and
psychometrically robust assessment of candidates enables the interviewers to
flesh out the details of what they might already ‘instinctively know’.
•
EQi allows you to use your instinct*, the ‘gut-feel factor’, in people decisions.
This is fundamental to us as human beings yet, with EQi in play, we avoid the
risk that an unconscious ‘gut feeling’ is taking us in a counter-productive
direction.
•
EQi saves us from recruiting people we like, or people who are like us, rather
than people who have the necessary competencies to succeed in the role.
*All the available research shows that this is what we actually use to make decisions
anyway; we merely rationalise those instincts afterwards in an attempt to fit in with
the perceived norm that our decisions are, or should be, logical.
Case study 1 – experience vs flair
[The names in this case study are, of course, changed.]
Julie and Sharon are up for a job with an SME of 200+ people.
Julie has far more experience and is an older candidate. She’s been there, done that,
and can do everything the job will require. After the first interview, she is the
preferred candidate.
Sharon is younger, with less experience, but with a good track record in her last job.
She is seen as a higher risk by the interview panel, but there is something undeniably
attractive about her, and the panel want to see her again.
The panel are aware that they are not really sure what else they can glean from a
second interview. What is it that makes them feel, against the obvious logic, that
Sharon has an edge over Julie? It’s an instinctual ‘something’ but surely that can’t
compete with Julie’s experience?
Both candidates complete a Bar-On EQi, and then Indigo Brave's accredited
facilitator spends one hour giving feedback to the interview panel.
The job is as a Customer Service Representative.
Each candidate has fairly average overall EQi scorings, but there is a clear contrast
across certain scales. The Reality Testing scale is crucial for Customer Service, as is
Self Actualisation, Optimism and Happiness, and Interpersonal Relationships. This is
not necessarily what you would expect, and it is interesting that Reality Testing is
more important than Empathy or Assertiveness.
There are no real issues with super-experienced Julie’s overall EQi scoring, which
was rated as average for her age and gender. However, she was lower than average in
Reality Testing, Self Actualisation and Optimism – three out of the five scales
required to be a Star Performer in her role.
Sharon, the younger candidate, also scored about average overall. Importantly,
though, she was higher than average in ALL five scales required for a Star Performer
in that role. She had real potential to excel in that role, whereas Julie had potential to
manage the role adequately. This was a key role in an SME that could make a
dramatic difference to the bottom line.
Who do you believe got the job?
Case study 2 – drive vs empathy
A position was available for a senior manager within a customer service team. The
two candidates who came forward seemed to be very evenly matched - we shall call
them Andi and Bessie. Both were highly experienced and competent. Neither seemed
to have the edge and the interviewing panel were struggling to choose between them.
Andi seemed a little ‘steadier’, perhaps more immediately likeable. Bessie seemed a
bit more ambitious, energetic, and more of a ‘go-getter’.
There was disagreement in the panel - would the ‘drive’ of Bessie fit within the team,
or put a strain on the already established relationships within that team? How would
Bessie handle people who had been there a long time and may move slower than she
did?
The EQi results were illuminating.
Andi’s results were above average overall, but she scored poorly in Self Actualisation,
Self Regard, and Happiness. These are important competencies for successful senior
managers (source: The EQ Edge, Stein and Howard, 2006).
Bessie’s results were also above average overall, but she was much stronger in the
Self Actualisation, Self Regard, and Happiness scales. Interestingly, Bessie’s lowest
scoring was Impulse Control, confirming the feelings that had been raised by some of
the panel.
Bessie’s answers to the Impulse Control questions were analysed in depth, and it
could be seen that, while Bessie knew herself to be somewhat impulsive/spontaneous,
this did NOT extend to having difficulty with keeping her temper at work, with
talking too much, or with dealing with slower people.
When looked at in combination with her Empathy answers, it could be seen that
Bessie actually had a highly developed understanding of other people’s feelings, and
was well aware of the importance of recognising that different people work in
different ways.
This meant that the interview panel had a rich area to probe for second interview and
could also put their minds at rest as to whether Bessie’s drive was likely to lead to
pushing people beyond what they could manage.
Although Andi did well at the second interview stage, Bessie excelled. She
demonstrated her ability to show understanding as well as drive, and her awareness of
the importance of this for established teams. She was appointed.
Star profiling – becoming a phenomenal recruiter
In 1996, Major Rich Handley was the Head of Recruiting Services in the US Airforce
and he had a serious problem.
Turnover among recruiters in the USAF was at 25%. This was costing the US
Airforce $3 million per annum (in 1996 that was even more significant than it would
be today).
Rich Handley used the Bar-On EQi to profile a group of 476 successful recruiters –
those who were meeting 100% of their recruitment target and remaining in post. He
also profiled 114 unsuccessful recruiters, who were meeting less than 31% of their
target and not remaining in post.
From this he developed an EQ profile for a successful recruiter, and used it to assign
labels of excellent, good, fair, poor and bad to recruiters and potential recruiters.
It turned out that a Star Recruiter was strong in:
Assertiveness
Empathy
Happiness
Emotional Self-Awareness
Problem Solving
This is not necessarily what you would associate with excellent Airforce recruitment.
Interestingly, it also had nothing to do with the content of any training they went
through… but that’s another story (ask us if you'd like to hear more about using EQ in
training).
The year after this work was carried out the loss rate went from 100 people down to 8.
This amounted to a saving of $2.7 million and was minuted in a US Government
bulletin.
1996 – 1998 Source: GAO report – Military Recruiting: Jan 30th 1998
The way forward
Your recruitment will improve immediately if you give leading candidates an EQ
assessment.
Your interviewing panels will become more confident and effective if they go through
their own EQ assessments.
If you use EQ assessments to develop star performers profiles for key roles in your
organisation, your recruitment will become so effective it will act as a genuine market
advantage.
If you would like to talk to us about implementing EQ assessments, or to ask any
questions about the use of EQ in your particular field, or in training processes, we
would be glad to hear from you.
You can contact us by:
Email: info@indigobrave.com
Website: www.IndigoBrave.com/contact
Phone: 01158-377974
Or you could just send a carrier pigeon to:
Indigo Brave Ltd
The Eco-Space Business Centre,
27 Montfort Crescent,
Sherwood,
Nottingham
NG5 3EH