Conducting Skills Assessments

Three unpopular ways companies can remove bias from their hiring process. 👯 More interviewers Those posts that go viral about hiring someone after a single coffee chat? Or mocking hiring managers that need a panel ? That's all bias - decisions based on gut instincts instead of with objective criteria. Instead, involve multiple interviewers with different perspectives - a peers and key stakeholders may have different interactions with the new team member, and their input can help you make a better decision. 🔎 This is backed up research from Harvard that shows that structured interviews with multiple interviewers are 2x more predictive of success in the role than unstructured ones. 🪧 Assess skills I know skills assessments aren't popular, and many people claim that they won't engage in a process that includes them. But lots of people can talk the talk and make up examples in interviews. It's harder to fake hard skills. If you're hiring a financial analyst, ask them to build a model using dummy data. If you're hiring a social media manager, ask them to create a plan for a campaign for a fake product. Work samples are great as well! And then dig in with questions to fully understand what they did, why they made the choices they made, etc. to ensure they didn't just submit something where someone else did the work. 🔎 And the research backs it up: the Aberdeen Group did a study that showed that those who completed skills assessments had a 36% higher rate of retention in their roles than those who didn't. 💰 Don't negotiate Negotiation increases inequity. When companies are big on negotiation, hiring managers will suggest things like "let's go in at X so when they negotiate we can bump up to Y." Then the candidates who don't ask for more end up underpaid. It promotes playing games and the people who are afraid to push are the ones who will be negatively impacted. Instead, companies should be transparent about their salary ranges and how compensation is determined, and then apply those practices consistently across all hires. Adjusting offers should be reserved for the rare cases where a candidate brings new information to the table around their qualifications or ability to have an impact, or the company realizes they're misaligned to the market. Now, I do know that many companies don't operate this way so it never hurts to ask, but just know that if a company comes up a lot with their offer after you negotiate, that's a signal that they were happy to try to lowball you. 🔎 And again, research backs this up: countless studies from McKinsey to Leanin to Harvard show that there are differences in who negotiates and in how negotiation is perceived, and this hurts people from marginalized groups. Like I said, these aren't necessarily popular ideas - they are more work for companies AND candidates. But they are research-backed ways to make hiring more equitable. And that's something we should all support.

In the pursuit of diversity and inclusion, one hurdle that often times impacts efforts is Affinity Bias. Could this silent enemy be impacting your hiring and talent development practices? Affinity bias, the tendency to gravitate towards individuals who share similar attributes to our own, often subconsciously influences our decision-making. In hiring, it's crucial to mitigate such biases to ensure equal opportunities. But How can we eliminate affinity bias? ~ Incorporate structured interviews and performance processes, where each candidate is asked the same set of questions. ~ Use skills-based assessments to objectively evaluate capabilities, minimize factors that are personality based.  ~Train your hiring team and people leaders to recognize and counteract their biases. ~ Make space for Transparency so that leaders can candidly  be supported through key processes.  Above all, foster a culture that values inclusivity. Remember, diversity isn't just about filling quotas. It's about enriching teams with varied perspectives to fuel innovation and growth. Are you taking steps to counteract affinity bias in your hiring and talent development process? #AffinityBias #DiversityandInclusion #HiringPractices

Recruiting leaders in our community have wrestled with how to balance AI-enabled candidates. We worked with a team that's hiring a data analyst to develop an approach to assess for SQL skills. Here's how we structured the process to try to balance the very likely possibility of candidates using AI tools. First, making use of new tools has always been disruptive to recruiting and is the exciting part of moving our collective work forward. On the one hand, when you have someone join your team you want them to be resourceful and efficient. This is a really positive and great thing! On the other hand, you also want to make sure they understand how things work and use their individual creativity to think of new and novel solutions. Here's the process we're trying: Take-home assignment Data: we provided the database schema and sample set of data of typical recruiting data - jobs, applications, offers Questions: we asked a series of questions about the data for common use cases to test both recruiting intuition and hard skills. For example, calculating offer acceptance rates test for their intuition on anchoring to the appropriate date, handling candidates with multiple offers, and joining tables to get to a good answer. So yes, candidates can and will likely use some 'assistance' but AI responses are only as good as the prompt. Assuming the logic and explanation make sense, you can then dig deeper at onsite. Onsite interview Test their understanding by continuing to build upon the take-home assignment in a live interview. For example, pull up a candidate's response to calculating offer acceptance rates and ask them to adapt it to group by each department. If they didn't write it or understand their initial take-home response, it will be very evident in the live interview. However, someone that understood the result and just used AI to build it faster could demonstrate how to make the adjustments Curiosity - a characteristic of a high performing analyst is their level of curiosity. When given a dataset they can't help but explore it beyond the prompt. It's like an artist with paint and a canvas, the possibilities! So a great open question to assess for both curiosity and recruiting domain knowledge is to ask what other questions they have about the data, the process that drives the inputs, or other metrics that could be derived. What techniques are you trying to find a healthy balance to assess AI-enabled candidates?

The best people we've hired have done a single thing that's made them stand out above the rest. Every is capable of doing it, and few actually do. It is this -- Proactive interview followup with value This is how you do it. During your interview with a hiring manager ask "What are your top 3 challenges this quarter" -- and ask follow up questions to really understand the problems. After the interview -- Pick 1 of 3 the problems and make 3-5 slides about how you would solve the problem. Make assumptions about how the business is run and call out where you're making assumptions. Here's the catch -- you'll likely be WRONG about your solutions (because you're an outsider). That is okay. This is a display of proactivity, initiative, and problem solving. It shows that you can do the job and creates great content for the next interview. NEXT -- Create a 2min Loom (or written memo via email) to pair along with the slides and send it to the HM (and, as relevant, any other interviewers) This is in addition to any homework / take home assessment that is part of the interview. It's secret extra credit. Go do it and let me know how it goes

I have a lot of candidates email me months after we’ve spoken about roles and say, “Has anything new opened up that would match my skillset?” Oof. I don’t know off hand. Here’s what to include when following up with a recruiter: - Re-attach your resume - Put in the email a quick summary of your experience, and if possible, reference anything memorable from the interaction. It’s been a few months. A recruiter probably remembers your name but it is very difficult to recall your exact experience with no additional information included. - Since you’ve spoken, include anything new (I just got a promotion, I’m leading an additional group, I completed XYZ certification). It's OK to brag - we know you are awesome! - Do the leg work and look at the company's careers page. Did you see anything you’re interested in? Include a link to that and say why you think you’re qualified or why you want to learn more You don’t need to email a novel, but when you send a “You Up?” email, you are basically asking a recruiter to go back through their notes, find your resume and notes from the conversation, scour the company’s careers page and try to guess what might fit. That’s a lot of work for them. It might seem manageable, but recruiters speak to often thousands of candidates a year. Hope that helps! I know it’s frustrating when people don’t respond to your emails, so make it as easy as possible for them! Good luck with the search - I am rooting for you! #applyingforjobs #jobinterviewtips #recruiting

What if the best interview you’ve ever had... actually felt like the job? Not a test. Not a performance. Just a thoughtful, scenario-based conversation—designed to reveal how you think, collaborate, and adapt in real-time. Recently, I tested a new approach to hiring for a key role on my team. I'm calling it a "Conversational Assessment." It's structured but flows more naturally. It's designed with intention but totally unscripted. And it gets straight to the signal that actually matters. Too many interview assessments feel bloated and performative.. • Homework assignments that stretch into 8+ hours. • Panels that ask the same questions three different ways. • High-potentials being filtered out for not being polished “just right.” Instead, I built a format that simulates the real work. Talking through real-world challenges. Following the thread of a candidate’s thought process. Exploring how they pivot, listen, and solve problems in real time. The feedback so far? •“That was the most natural interview I’ve ever had.” • “I didn’t feel like I had to perform—I could just show how I think.” • “I learned more about how you approach your work in 30 minutes than I usually do in a full interview loop.” We get better insight to how people think and operate. Our candidates feel less of a burden to prepare performative work. Everyone shares a much clearer view of what it could be like to work together. Another unique aspect of this approach is that it forces you to reveal aspects of how you work too—and this may even show a candidate that THEY aren't a fit for YOU as a manager! This is still early days. I'm still learning. But it’s a direction that feels right. Huge shoutout to my talent partner Hannah McCord—who not only embraced the approach while helping me hire but has also been sharing the concept with a few other hiring managers at Fleetio who are experimenting with it too. —— This is one small way we’re rethinking how hiring can reflect the way we work and what we value at Fleetio. If you'd like to learn more, check out the first comment for some key roles we're hiring for now!

Hiring the wrong person? It's not just a mistake. It's a disaster. 💥 A position opens up. You rush to fill it. The candidate looks great on paper. They ace the interview. But then reality hits. The skills they promised? Nowhere to be found. The experience they touted? Exaggerated. Suddenly, you're not just dealing with a bad hire. You're facing operational chaos. Team morale takes a nosedive. Productivity plummets. It's a CEO's nightmare. But here's the good news: it's preventable. The secret? Revolutionize your hiring process. Stop relying on resumes and rehearsed interviews. They're not enough. Instead, put candidates to the test. Real tests. Real scenarios. Real challenges. Here's how: 𝟭. Skill assessments: Don't just ask about skills. Test them. 𝟮. Real-world scenarios: Present actual challenges your company faces. See how they problem-solve in real-time. 𝟯. Trial projects: Give them a taste of the actual work. See if they can walk the talk. 𝟰. Team interactions: Let them spend time with potential colleagues. Cultural fit matters. 𝟱. Reference deep dives: Don't just check boxes. Have real conversations about performance. Yes, it takes more time up front. But think of the time (and money) you'll save in the long run. No more mis-hires. No more skills gaps. No more team disruptions. Instead, you'll build a team of proven performers. People who can truly deliver on their promises. Remember, every hire is a bet on your company's future. Make it a calculated one. Don't gamble with your team's success. Invest in a hiring process that truly works. 💯 #hiringstrategies #recruitmentrevolution #leadershiplessons

Stop telling me how good you are. Show me instead. A director candidate spent 30 minutes telling us about his amazing leadership skills. Then we asked him to solve a real problem from the company's business. He froze. Another candidate barely mentioned her experience. Instead, she tackled our case study and showed exactly how she'd approach the market challenges. Guess who got the job? Too many companies run interviews like podcasts. All talk. No action. A CEO recently told me he doesn't care what people say they can do. He cares what they actually do when faced with their problems. That's why the best interview processes include: 🟠  Case studies that mirror real work  🟠  Role plays with actual scenarios  🟠  Take-home assignments that showcase thinking A candidate complained to me about a test project last week. I asked if he would hire someone without seeing their work. He went silent. These exercises aren't hoops to jump through. They're previews of your actual working relationship. They show you how candidates think. They show candidates how you operate. They reveal alignment before anyone signs an offer. The best candidates don't fear this process. They welcome it. Because they know talking about skills is easy. Demonstrating them is what matters. #Recruiting #ExecutiveSearch #Hiring #Leadership

"Keep up the good work!" "You're doing a great job!" "I really enjoyed your presentation." "You handled that call really well." Unspecific positive feedback is not helpful. How would any of those statements actually help a person grow? How would any of those statements even help a person duplicate what they did? They won't. If someone is doing a great job, tell them how. What specifically did you like about their presentation? What were 3 things they did during the call that made it a success? Why are those things important? Would something have gone wrong had they not done them? Try something like: "You handled that call really well. I like how you set a prep call with me before-hand so we could get on the same page. You facilitated a good discussion and made everyone feel heard, while ensuring we got through the whole agenda. You then circulated clear action items on your own, without my asking you to do it. Because you did that, there's a great chance we can wrap up this project on time." "Great job" might feel a lot better than "Plz revise thx". But it's just as (un)likely to lead to any growth. #management #growth #feedback #development

They’re the hardest to measure. The hardest to develop. The hardest to replace. And yet, they’re often treated like an afterthought. In reality, they’re what separate great hires from bad ones. 👉 Emotional intelligence. 👉 Problem-solving. 👉 Communication. 👉 Adaptability. 👉 Influence. These aren’t just workplace buzzwords. They’re the skills that drive innovation, collaboration, and leadership. As Peter Drucker put it: “The most important thing in communication is hearing what isn’t said.” But here’s the problem: - Job seekers struggle to prove these skills. - Hiring managers struggle to assess them. - Traditional hiring methods (resumes, interviews, even technical tests) aren’t built to measure them effectively. So how do you recognize spot these skills in candidates? 🔹 Go beyond the resume. Instead of relying on past job titles, ask about challenges they’ve faced and how they navigated them. Stories reveal problem-solving, communication, and adaptability. 🔹 Listen for “we” vs. “I.” UCandidates who naturally talk about teamwork, collaboration, and shared success tend to have strong interpersonal and leadership skills. 🔹 Test for adaptability. Throw in a curveball question. See how they respond to an unexpected change. Are they flustered, or do they roll with it? 🔹 Look for self-awareness. Ask about a time they received tough feedback and how they handled it. Someone with strong emotional intelligence won’t just blame others—they’ll reflect, adapt, and improve. 🔹 Pay attention to how they interact. The way candidates communicate with you in the hiring process is often the best indicator of their soft skills. Do they listen actively? Ask thoughtful questions? Show curiosity? Soft skills might be hard to measure, but they’re impossible to fake. And hiring without considering them? That’s a costly mistake. What are your go-to strategies for assessing these essential skills in candidates? Let’s compare notes. ⬇️