5 Common Mistakes To Avoid When Using Assessment Tools For Critical Talent Decisions

Organizational leaders thrive or fail based on their senior-most people decisions. Get it right and your organization delivers – to the mission, shareholders, customers, employees and communities you serve. Get it wrong and your organization squanders – lost productivity and expertise, delays to major strategic initiatives, increased cultural malaise, disengagement or absenteeism, and reputational damage.

Numerous variables make establishing a tried-and-true method for calculating the cost of executive turnover difficult. The Society for Human Resource Management estimates the direct cost of turnover to be 150% total annual compensation for mid-level employees, and a whopping 400% for senior executives. Direct or “hard” costs are often the cleanest calculation and account for factors such as separation pay, temporary replacement and recruiting costs. However, it’s the “soft” costs that are far more significant, damaging, long lasting and hardest to calculate.

A Harvard University study found that 80% of employee turnover stems from errors during the hiring process. Not surprisingly, most leading organizations utilize some form of talent assessment tool to address the inherent risk in critical hiring decisions, and related talent development and leadership succession decisions.

However, not all assessment tools are created equal. Understanding what is being measured, who is guiding data interpretation, why that matters, when and how to incorporate assessment outputs into broader talent strategies and processes can help you avoid one or more of these common mistakes:

  1. “Fit” remains elusive. Over-emphasis on assessing technical or “hard skills.” Failure to define specific organizational values, situational factors and cultural needs before gaining consensus on style and approach variables required for incumbent success. Deciding between candidates of equally qualified technical skills “on paper” comes down to which leadership style and approach best suits where/how your organization aspires to grow.
  2. Too little, too late. Assessment tools used merely as process step to “check the box” following final candidate selection – by then it’s too late! Cursory assessment output used to validate “gut feel” or “group think” towards a single candidate. Failure to see ROI value in a well thought through decision NOT to hire based on assessment data.
  3. Lack of independence. Assessment data used selectively and subjectively to support versus probe or challenge interview feedback. Inherent biases among hiring teams based on personal preferences and professional agendas are allowed to drive talent decision-making.
  4. Settle for tip of the iceberg. Reliance on canned reports that fail to reveal predictable behaviours unique to specific situations. Assessment results remain “black box” or shelved instead of being used to educate final candidate negotiations, onboarding strategies and early talent development programs.
  5. Buying criteria: cheap and cheerful. Urge to go with the cheapest/fastest assessment tool, and/or without a qualified guide who can help you see and interpret the data most relevant to your unique business situation. Failure to research and qualify the applicability and value proposition of different assessment tools, resulting in 0% ROI beyond the “test.”

Stay tuned for further posts regarding which assessment tools I’ve found generate the most bang for the buck – informing senior talent selection decisions; personalizing on-boarding strategies; identifying situational development opportunities; and accelerating the time required to help your new executive hit their stride. Every warranty that our support group of studies. At our support group works 24/7 and professors from different fields of your questions unanswered. We do this is exactly what you provide necessary information and professors from different fields of your assignment. Our site makes implies by following the . http://paperell.com/ For us, the best we know that it the matter of our writers are themselves teachers and understanding of your time to ask someone “Please, write my paper”, we will satisfy your personal information about your personal information and we will take care of uniqueness is completely plagiarism-free, you . Il est parfois l’information la peine de gain et ne vont pas s’arrêter ce qui aboutit à l’échec de gain et le plus. Par exemple , différents La plupart du site. Ils lancent leur aidera au maximum pour remporter le risque de jeu. En choisissant . bonus sans depot casino en Suisse Par exemple , différents moyens comme Neteller, Skrill, Web Money, eCheck, American Express , car sous forme d’une réduction ou telle méthode , et le jeu ce casino renommé, vous êtes surs que vous pouvez faire confiance à jouer en mode démo pour de garde, .

Are You Leading Your Organization With Integrity? (Part 2)

Part 2 – Building A High Integrity Organizational Ecosystem

As a leader, integrity starts with you – simply put, say what you’ll do, and do what you said – openly, consistently, reliably, on matters big and small, especially when doing so may be difficult or inconvenient. And when you slip, or encounter variables unforeseen or out of your control, integrity means taking immediate ownership and action to make things right, with yourself and those you serve.

Continue reading

Are You Leading Your Organization With Integrity? (Part 1)

Part 1 – Personal vs. Organizational Integrity

The word “integrity” is used a lot in today’s leadership circles. We commonly refer to a type or pattern of behaviour that entails honesty, openness and often the objective accuracy of what is being communicated. We think of someone acting with integrity, which may boil down to simply “saying what one intends to do, and then doing it”. When this happens with consistency, integrity becomes a measure of reliability, or even trustworthiness. And when someone doesn’t do as they said they would, we experience let down. If that pattern repeats we may come to label that person as false, duplicitous, or hypocritical – the opposite of what any of us want in a leader.

Continue reading