Managers and organization leaders have become complacent about the failure to hire the right person first time. It has become acceptable that hiring is a hit-and-miss process. Not enough people take the cost to the organization seriously, because they do not feel it is something that they have control over.
Too many excuses:
- “I need someone now, and that’s all there is in the market place right now.”
- “You can’t really tell until they’ve been working for you for at least 3 to 6 months.”
- And many more…
We’ve accepted the failures of hiring and personality profiling systems for too long. So,
How do you select the right person to join your team?
How do you avoid making the same mistake over-and-over?
The energy and effort associated with high-attrition rates alone are a huge drain on managers and recruiters. Little-less when you consider lost customers, lost opportunities and even the impact on morale of others on the team.
It is a great problem, which is either ignored or accepted as if nothing can be done about it.
How do you pick the right person?
Much research has been done over the years to establish what it costs when an organization hires incorrectly. Needless to say the cost to small business can be devastating. It has been estimated that the cost attributed to a wrong hire is between 4-5 times the annual salary of that role. So a $50,000 p.a. role could cost an organization as much $200k-$250k.
While many larger organization are able to sweep these costs under the carpet, and call it the cost of doing business, small organization cannot afford such a great expense. Yet, recruiting services costs have continued to escalate putting these tools and services further out of the reach of the small business owner.
There are several factors to be considered when assessing the impact of a wrong hire. Some of the key ones include;
- Recruiting time (30-50hrs)
- Cost to train
- Time to get up to speed
- Lost business opportunities
- Brand damage
- Reduced loyalty
- Impact on morale
- more …
Many of the options available to most people don’t achieve the desired results, so they opt to trust their gut instinct rather than the sciences. Unfortunately, many of the systems available were created at least 30 to 40 years ago. In some cases it has taken that long for those systems to become main stream.
DISC is based on William Marston’s research published in 1928, was developed into DISC assessment in the early 70’s and is now just becoming popular with many organizations.
Many of the profiling systems, while they have many benefits, we’ve found their reliability, especially in hiring, to be less than 50% effective. Their biggest short coming stems from the fact that;
- Many of them categorize people into just Four quadrants, and the population of this planet cannot fit neatly in just 4 areas. There are billions of variations that depict each person, and these systems do not adequately provide the insight needed to truly understand what motivates a person’s behaviour.
- The information these are based on dates back to the late 1920’s. NLP was found in the 70’s/80’s, has since changed the world of Psychology and now profiling.
- Multiple-choice questionnaires undermine the very fabric of profiling. Profiling is based on what people say and do, their spoken and written words in conjunction with the mannerisms they use to communicate.
There is over 50 characteristic traits identified in NLP through meta-programs. During the study of NLP and later extensive profile testing led to the creation of the LAB-Profile in 1982. Acu-Match is an amalgamation of information, from many of the past systems with the new systems. We believe it to be one of the most advanced today.
We need a more easily administered solution, that gives a greater insight.
We have a solution
Organizations are looking for a solution that allows them to hire correctly, and motivate people to stay longer.
Enough variations to pick even the smallest subtleties which make us, each and every person, unique.
Powerful, yet simple.
- A system which asks natural questions, rather than canned suspicious multiple-choice questions that people try to guess what you are getting at, and give you the answer they think you are looking for.
- uses natural conversational questions. Candidates are required to answer each question in their own language, and style. It’s conversational. It’s natural.
- A system which identifies over 52 attributes that give you the insight you need as a recruiter or manager to make an educated, accurate decision.
- When used in combination, the groups of behaviour traits provide a greater insight into the qualities appropriate for different roles and different work environments. Giving you the ability to associate how a person will likely respond in a specific work context, allowing you to coach them, mentor them and guide their growth.
- A system that is based on new scientific evidence not out-date ones.