OK, the word “intangibles” in the title might seem a little esoteric, but it’s something we’ve all come up against in the HR world. We try to source candidates based on a sheet of paper (which we so often stress should only be one page). We ask a variety of questions in an interview - some of which give us useful results, some of which don’t. Then we make an offer that we hope will top talent will be enticed to accept.
/ Z1 K+ g, d" J _' nEvery step of the hiring process has
costs attached to it, and we try to carefully monitor all of them. But are HR professionals ignoring the intangibles that can help them place the
best talent? Are we forgetting to take into account the needs and desires of the candidates themselves?
1 s" D: `. [7 E
If that sounds too “touchy-feely,” good luck in the ongoing
War on Talent, because getting “touchy-feely” (maybe aka “recognizing intangibles”) are increasingly what makes the difference between an adequate candidate and a dream candidate. Which do you want to place?
6 v G4 i; E1 u x& H+ s
In a great post on
KnowHR.com Frank Roche recommends “hiring the best.” OK, sure. Sounds obvious right? Only, how do you assess “the best,” and what does “the best” even mean for your purposes. Well, for starters you better
really understand the position’s needs. The next step is figuring out a candidate’s potential. Roche links out to a post by Mosiac founder
Marc Andreessen, in which he argues that “intelligence, per se, is highly overrated.”
$ R% {& `0 U9 c" ~6 K2 L! ^
Instead, he says we should be assessing drive, curiosity and ethics in addition to demonstrated intelligence. He defines drive as “self-motivation,” the lack of which will cost an orginzation down the road. Curiosity is a “a proxy for do you love what you do?” Ethics is harder to asses, but an honest, ethical employee is going to provide obvious payoffs for any organization worth its salt.
" l8 ^$ s |+ Y X8 @0 j
The interview process is probably the most practical place to assess these intangible characteristics, which is why Andreessen advocates planning out your questions and watching for “the little things” during the interview. Reading the interviewee (like a poker player, perhaps) is at least as important as getting answers to interview questions.
2 r& H$ o$ v. Q$ q; @# u, G G5 i
Trying to assess the intangibles
before the interview process is a little trickier, but not impossible, especially if
your sourcing system is set up properly. Your criteria should be broader than just what a one-page resume provides. You should always try to read between the lines and gauge the candidates “intangibles.”
