I have to make a decision about hiring a personal assistant within the next few days and I absolutely can’t decide who to hire. Frankly I have very little experience making this type of decision, particularly in hiring someone for a position that effects me (and my productivity) so directly. I’m fortunate to have found a good handful of qualified applicants (about 5 really solid options) out of a large pool of respondents. I think all 5 have graduate degrees from Ivy League schools and relevant work experience. What I’m stuck on is the subtle differences and unique balances of skills that each applicant has. For instance, one applicant has had somewhat more relevant work experience but ultimately does not seem as intelligent as ‘less experienced’ applicant. Also, I’m not sure how much emphasis to place on applicant’s personalities as opposed to more objective measures of ability.
What rules, tricks or systematic approaches have helped you make successful hiring decisions?
oh and Kindly refrain from broaching the grammatical nuances of dependent clauses and subjective/objective pronouns (whom the heck cares about such things anyway? )
I’ve hired about 15 people during the past 5 years. None has been as an assistant. Most have been to support type positions. 3 or 4 have been more senior positions.
I’ve had a pretty good success rate. Most hires have been very good. A couple of duds. Some people simply interview well but prove ineffective once hired.
Typically, I hire people without anybody else’s input. On occasion, I seek other managers’ input by subjecting the interviewee to a panel type interview.
I have a stock list of questions, but my interviews usually devolve into a less formal type of conversation.
I do not favour someone who is feeding me safe answers. I am more likely to hire someone with a strong personality. I am really impressed with someone who has the balls to disagree with me during an interview. On the job, I am most certainly the boss. My decision is the bottom line. However, I want to surround myself with people who are not afraid to offer up alternative viewpoints. I’m not above being swayed by a good argument during the decision making process. If you’re telling me something only because you think that’s what I want to hear, you’re not really contributing much.
I usually have a good feel for someone at the end of an initial interview. Sometimes a second interview isn’t even necessary. It comes down to a gut feel for me. If I feel that an interviewee would be a good person to have a beer with at the end of the day, that person has a reasonably good chance of getting hired.
According to your post, all the basic things such as qualifications have been addressed and you are free to pick from among the five.
Those times when I’ve been faced with this situation, I imagine each one actually on the job. I imagine him/her interacting with co-workers and performing the job’s routine tasks.
It’s been my experience that the ones that do these things well will turn out to be the best hire. You’ve reached the point at which you will have to trust your intuition.
If qualifications are roughly equivalent, go by who seems to want it more and who seems to be the one that you can best see yourself working with closely.
If you are actually in Fukang, China, and talking about a Chinese Ivy League applicant, then you need to hire the one that will listen, raise their own opinion & learn. Otherwise, you’re likely to get someone that “knows it all” better than you do, and make your life a living hell. On the other hand, someone with a brain and opinion, but willing to concede they don’t know everything and have a passion for learning will probably be a good hire.
am I really the only person on the board who derives so much satisfaction out of the pronunciation of Fukang that he felt compelled to pretend to live there?
If the candidates all have reasonably equal qualifications and acceptable personalities, hire the most attractive member of your preferred gender. That way, even if they fail to work out as you’d hoped, at least you’ll have something nice to look at.
Bascally, the #1 predictor of how well someone will do in a job is how much the person wants it. So try to gauge who seems the most enthusiastic about that.
At the same time, the most important factor in hiring someone is how much the interviewer likes him personally (to give an obvious extreme example, if your girlfriend/boyfriend applies and is generally qualified, they’re going to be the top candidate if it’s your decision alone). So there’s nothing wrong with picking the person you feel most comfortable with.
<hijacking my own thread>
Once I’ve picked my assistant, what is the most professional (and/or nicest) way to inform the other candidates? Phone call? E-mail? Should I personalize the rejections (i.e. "you are a highly qualified wonderful for reason A, B and C but I chose someone with ‘x’ ability) or just keep it very vague “we have chosen someone else, thank you for your time”.
Ultimately it doesn’t matter it one sense, but at the same time, one never knows when I may come across the other applicants again and its best not to burn any bridges.
</hijacking my own thread>
Speaking as someone who has been rejected by tons of job offers by simply being blown off post-interview, I’d say that ANY way you want to inform them is good enough. Never tell someone they’re “overqualified” and then fail to hire them, though. If they’re applying, they want the job. Not hiring someone who you’ve already told can do the job well is a slap in the face.
After re-reading, I realize the above sounds flippant. That was not my intent. Apologies.
Before you notify any of those who weren’t selected, call the one you want and make sure they still want the job!
Then follow up with first-class letters.
The letter to the one being hired should include the location, time and date when they are expected to report for work, and any other pertinent details.
After you are sure that #1 still wants the job, mail the rejection letters. Do not delay!
Keep copies of all correspondence.
A number of bad things can come from EEO complaints. Proper documentation can save you a lot of grief. Even unfounded claims can be difficult if it comes down to a he said/she said situation.
One rule I’ve learned the hard way is not to hire people who were recommended by someone you know or who already works for you.
This has backfired on me several ways.
One had been assured by her friend that I was open to part timers. So, once hired full time she demanded I allow her part time status. Which I went along with. Then she told me she was contracting on the side to end up working full time, just not full time with us. When her second job took all her attention she was fired, but her friend left out of sympathy.
The worst was one who I hired that was recommended by someone I’d recently promoted. The candidate was told by him that we were in hiring mode and that promotion would be rapid. But he was the last I wanted to hire, and I needed him at the bottom of the organization chart. He was discontented from the first assignment and made a big fuss when he left after only a few months, complaining he’d been mislead (by his friend, not me, but that’s not what my partners heard.)
)