The decision to hire a candidate involves numerous steps. The gap in human resources has to be acknowledged, the list of vacancies needs to be prepared, the requirement for each particular role has to be analysed, recruitment needs to occur and the hiring manager has to select the most suitable candidate after various rounds of filtering. This is a tedious process.
In the process of hiring, It is possible that certain unfavourable attributes of a prospective candidate may be overlooked.
Though a candidate seems suitable at first glance, there are a fair number of reasons that he/she may not be the right person for a particular role or for the team or organisation as a whole. Here are five types of people to avoid while making a hiring decision.
Steer Clear Of These 5 Kinds Of Candidates!
Try and avoid these 5 kinds of candidates while you are hiring!
1. The Solo Flier!
Some people prefer to work alone. They feel that their concentration and productivity is higher if they are working alone vis-a-vis working alongside their colleagues.
They also claim that they save time since decision-making is faster and less time is spent on discussions. Some people are also possessive about their projects. However, no man (or woman) is an island. As part of a team, one has to be open to inputs from others and has to be able to collaborate with his/her team members.
A solo flier will be a bad hire especially for a role that is client-facing, involves frequent reporting or working with other teams.
Keeping one’s mind open and being receptive is the key in many roles. With the increasing usage of technology at the workplace, it is no longer adequate if a person can sit in front of a computer and complete the assigned tasks without interacting with others. The art of effective communication is a sine-qua-non since it is an important soft skill that cannot be replaced by a machine.
2. The (Secretly) Disinterested One!
Even if a person is not genuinely interested in a particular role, there are many reasons why a person can apply for it. The most common one is compensation.
There are many candidates who apply for a job only for the monetary benefits involved. There might be other reasons such as wanting to join the organisation but being disinterested in the role for which you are hiring or wanting to be in a specific geographic location. Youngsters might apply for jobs only because they need a certain number of years of experience in a role for further education or career growth.
There might even be people who apply for personal reasons (for example, to be with their friends or partner).
One can argue that these reasons are good enough provided that the candidate has the necessary skill set.
However, these are shallow motivators. They do not guarantee sustained good performance. Only if a person is genuinely interested in the activities that need to be carried out as a part of the role, will he/she be motivated enough to consistently live up to his/her responsibilities? Otherwise, is bound to dwindle.
3. The One With The Mismatched Skills!
An employee who is highly ethical, very friendly and helpful, but lacks the skills or knowledge to be a performer in the role for which you are hiring, will ultimately drag the team behind.
While soft skills are important, their presence cannot substitute the capacity to deliver results.
At the end of the day, each member of a team has to produce results. The deliverables and responsibilities may vary from team to team or person to person. However, timely and high-quality outputs are non-negotiable expectations for any role.
A good way to deal with this type of candidate is to perform an assessment to arrive at the skills which they possess, analyse their suitability for other roles and refer him/her to a team which has more use for the individual’s capabilities.
For example, a person with excellent writing skills will be a better fit in the communications department of an organisation rather than in a team that involves programming.
4. The Dominating One!
People who are dominating can be demanding and condescending to their coworkers.
Even if they are good at their job, this particular trait in them can make them extremely unpopular and hamper the spirit of other team members, which can ultimately impact the performance.
Identifying this character in interviews is a tricky business. This is because dominating people portray themselves to be those who take a lot of initiative, are self-driven, extroverted and responsible.
It is to be noted that the line between being dominating and involving others in a fresh initiative is somewhat thin. The best way to weed out such characters in the hiring process is by making them participate in a group interaction. The true leaders will give everyone a voice while the dominating ones will not allow others to speak.
5. The Overworker!
There is a category of people who work constantly. They work long hours continuously and seldom take breaks.
This might seem like the behaviour of a hardworking employee but it can actually be counterproductive.
This is because rest is an essential element for consistent performance. One who is constantly thinking about work without engaging in other activities will burn out much faster than someone who allows the mind and body to get refreshed.
The tendencies of the overworker might also induce other employees to think that this is the standard that is expected.
Those who try and copy them might also run into the problem of decreased productivity. Those who don’t expose themselves to overworking run the risk of being branded as lazy. This leads to unhealthy competition. The habit of overworking also kills scope for smart working. The illusion of extra time due to additional hours combined with a decrease in efficiency can lead to wrong estimates while preparing timelines.
A hiring manager must exercise caution while searching for the perfect fit for a role. The possession of one or more of the above-mentioned traits must act as a red flag and should be incorporated in the hiring process.
Make sure you watch out for these traits during the hiring process!
I find the piece making very broad generalisations in the first place. Secondly, it is written with a recruiter’s bias putting the hiring company/recruiter in a holier position. Would like to read more nuanced pieces.