| The Wall Street Journal (10/23/06, pages B1 & | | | | have someone else do the "homework" or work |
| B8) reports on Google revamping its hiring | | | | simulation for them! Also, after the Work |
| methods. Google is on the right track, but is | | | | Simulation the applicant should be asked to deliver |
| sorely missing crucial pre-employment tests plus | | | | a brief presentation, so Google can assess |
| other prediction methods. | | | | communications skills. |
| Google needs a step-by-step hiring process in | | | | Fifth, Google definitely should conduct a Realistic |
| order to succeed to hire the best. Hiring Methods | | | | Job Preview, in which job applicant spends 4 - 10 |
| such as my "7-Step Method to Hire the Best" | | | | hours watching an employee actually do the job |
| zooms in on predicting if an applicant has skills and | | | | the applicant is applying for. Apparently, Google |
| talents similar to the company's high-achievers or | | | | fails to do this. Given its corporate culture and job |
| "superstars." It is progressive: If an applicant rates | | | | demands, this is a huge gap in its hiring |
| high on the first prediction step, then the applicant | | | | methodand one I strongly recommend Google |
| is allowed to try the second prediction method, | | | | start doing. |
| and so on. If an applicant earns only an average | | | | Sixth are Reference Checks, getting applicant's |
| or worse rating on any prediction method, then | | | | ex-bosses to "spill the beans" about the person's |
| that is the end of considering the applicant. (After | | | | good and bad work qualities. I devised a way to |
| all, who wants to hire an average or worse job | | | | "weasel" truthful reference checks from |
| applicant?) | | | | ex-bosses who may feel unwilling to open up. But, |
| The following are seven pre-hire prediction | | | | WSJ's article did not report on Google doing |
| methods I recommend all companies use, including | | | | ultra-revealing Reference Checks. |
| Google, along with comments on how well Google | | | | Finally, Google does great at having 1 Executive |
| currently does it. | | | | Approving or Disapproving Each Hiring |
| First, is Brief Initial Screening Interview which | | | | Recommendation. The purpose of this is to |
| focuses on whether applicant has biographical data | | | | assure the applicant received positive ratings on all |
| similar to its superstar employees. Google falls | | | | of the first six steps of my "7-Step Method to |
| short here, because it needs to identify the | | | | Hire the Best." Here, Google excelsbecause one of |
| bio-data of successful employees in each job | | | | its co-founders, Larry Page or Sergio Brin, |
| which WSJ did not say Google does. | | | | reviews hiring recommendations. Wisely, they |
| Second, are customized Pre-Employment Tests, | | | | sometimes do not allow managers to hire certain |
| so a company can prefer job applicants who get | | | | job applicants. |
| test scores similar to its superstar employees' | | | | For Google to grow from big to bigger, it needs a |
| test scores. Unfortunately, Google does not do | | | | customized, structured hiring method. Google aims |
| pre-employment tests. In fact, Google asks job | | | | to shorten its hiring process. But, unless Google |
| applicants to identify their personality traits and | | | | researches and creates an organized method, |
| past standardized test scores! That makes no | | | | such as the "7-Step Method to Hire the Best," it |
| sense. Reason: Any applicant with the IQ above | | | | could save a few dollarsbut waste millions on bad |
| tire pressure (e.g., Google applicants) can figure | | | | hiring decisions. |
| out if they should say they are, for instance, | | | | TOP TIPS to HIRE THE BEST |
| teamwork-oriented or creative or good at math | | | | 1.Use an organized method, e.g., the "7-Step |
| or other job talents. | | | | Method to Hire the Best." |
| Third, should be the In-Depth Interview, delving | | | | 2.Customize your organized hiring method. For |
| into the 6 - 9 most important job talents. While | | | | instance, customize each of the 7 steps or |
| Google does an average of 5.1 interviews for | | | | prediction methods. |
| hired applicants, there is no indication interviewers | | | | Customize (1) Brief Initial Screening Interview |
| have a neatly laid-out list like I would create of (a) | | | | focused on bio-data, (2) Pre-Employment Tests |
| 6 - 9 most important job talents, (b) specific | | | | customized for each job, (3) In-Depth Interviews |
| questions to ask to assess each job talent, and | | | | assessing 6 9 crucial job talents, (4) Work |
| (c) specific applicant actions to observe during | | | | Simulation or Role-Play, (5) Realistic Job Preview, |
| interview. Who knows what each interviewer | | | | (6) Weasel Reference Checks from Applicant's |
| asks? Also, WSJ did not say interviewers were | | | | Ex-Bosses, and (7) 1 Executive Approves |
| trained in how to conduct a customized, In-Depth | | | | Disapproves Each Hiring Decision. |
| Interview. | | | | 3.If you do not customize each of the 7-Step |
| Fourth is a Work Simulation or Role-Play, forcing | | | | Method to Hire the Best, then it is not worth your |
| applicant to demonstrate key job skills. Here, | | | | time or money. Without customization it is almost |
| Google seems to shinepartly. It gives applicants | | | | impossible for you to hire the best. |
| "homework." But, the work simulation should be | | | | Source: Michael Mercer, Ph.D., phone = |
| done in the Google office. Otherwise, applicants | | | | 847-382-0690 |
| can take it home, get friends to help, or even | | | | Copyright 2006 Michael Mercer, Ph.D. |