Published By:


How to weed out anti-leadership behaviour

By Michael Stern 2nd July 2008

Sounds simple, but the solution is to hire better

While recently talking to senior HR executives about my list of the 10 most common anti-leadership behaviours —like telling subordinates how to do things instead of letting them discover it for themselves, or withholding praise on the grounds that it only spoils people— I asked how chief executives can help their team members avoid such traps. One offered a solution that initially seemed simplistic, but now makes more and more sense: Hire better.

If you know what attributes you don't want in a leader, test for their opposites during the evaluation phase of a job search. If you want people who motivate others, prioritize, behave ethically or make tough decisions in a timely manner, confirm they have those traits, instead of just hoping the most qualified candidates will also be good leaders.

Here are a few areas where modifying your recruiting system —or getting back to basics— could make a big difference.

1. Know what you're trying to achieve —and how to measure it.
   Many employers are unable to explain how they will know if their new hires are successful. Employers say they want people who can build teams and increase efficiency - but what does that mean? How will those outcomes be measured?
   
   Granted, many accomplishments, such as building teams or boosting innovation, are hard to measure. But most companies don't even try. Here's the news about executive performance: what doesn't get measured tends not to get done.
   
   If an organization is serious about setting objectives for new hires, it needs a system for measuring results. To complete the loop, compensation should be tied to performance. Your measurement tools may be crude at first. But it's better to start measuring now, and improve as you go along, than to throw up your hands and let your best people drift.

    




2. Interview smart.
   Many executives are untrained in the art of the job interview. They're winging it. Yet interviews remain the most important part of the assessment process, and they deserve more attention and preparation.
   
   
   
   • Seek out training (or at least read some books) to become a better interviewer. Human resources may screen candidates first, but it's front-line managers who do most of the interviewing. The sad truth is, most job candidates today have had more interview training than the interviewers.
     
     If you oversee training, why not make interview training compulsory for key people? Make sure to bring in veteran, outside experts; your best people will skip out if the effort is led by a junior in HR.
   
   
   
   • Prepare a line of questioning that will help you understand a candidate's primary qualifications and experience. Ask for examples and anecdotes that will get candidates talking. Take notes so you'll remember who said what; you'll be surprised how quickly you can forget without them.
   
   
   
   • Make greater use of multiple interviews. At senior levels, interviewing is the art of searching for flaws in a candidate's polished professional façade. Inviting co-workers to interview candidates gives you more insights into each job-seeker's character, and more opportunities to identify weak points. Every interviewer has blind spots; a team approach provides 20-20 vision.
   
   
   
   • When conducting supplemental interviews, know the purpose of each. Set objectives (maybe you want to know more about the candidate's experience in your industry) and drill down. Don't just conduct the same interview over and over again.



3. Checking references —really!
   The least popular step in the recruiting process is calling candidates' former employers to find out how they performed in previous jobs. Many bosses and HR shy away from this —but it's the very best way to peer beneath a candidate's smooth veneer. Past performance is the best indicator we have of howa candidate will behave in future.

I recently saw one employer's reference report that contained almost no information, positive or negative, about the candidate. I think many interviewers approach this process with low expectations. They've heard that people are leery about criticizing former employees, so they don't expect to get much useful information.

My approach is different. If I ask enough questions, I know the truth will out. Sure, people dislike criticizing others. But they like lying outright even less. So I ask and re-ask questions: Can you tell me about any development areas in this person's performance? Any reasons for concern? Keep probing. If the former employer can't think of a single flaw, I might ask, "Oh, so she's perfect, then?" That usually prompts a quick denial, and then you get the real story.

Another way of approaching it is to sum up by asking, "Would you hire this person again?" Watch for any hesitation in the answer —you want to hear an unqualified "yes"— and probe for details.

The more effort you invest in your hiring process, the fewer surprises you'll find. And the better your results will be.