By Lynne Curry, Ph.D, SPHR bio
According to a Gallup poll, thirty percent or less than one-third of American workers describe themselves as “engaged” in their jobs and committed to their employers. A larger number, 54% percent, describe themselves as “disengaged” at work and not committed to their employers. These employees report feeling trapped in dull jobs and admit that they spend significant amounts of time researching alternative jobs. The final 16% define themselves as actively disengaged, often becoming organizational terrorists who intentionally sabotage other employee’s morale.
A recent University of Minnesota study of 1532 newly hired exempt employees holding positions in administration, engineering, IT, marketing and service job categories reveals that “engaged” employees differ from “disengaged” employees from their first day of hiring. From early on, disengaged employees don’t emotionally commit to the organization into which they’ve been hired.
Significant reasons for this stem from the applicant’s work orientation and the fact that these new hires don’t feel that they align with their co-workers’ values or the workplace culture and don’t feel that they receive sufficient coworker approval. During the course of the 20-month study, 98 of the disengaged employees quit their jobs.
How to hire engaged employees
Clearly, employers that want committed, productive, long-term employees need effective strategies for hiring the employees that both fit into the work group and can emotionally commit to a job and the employer.
Although employers need to ascertain these subjective issues when making hiring decisions, they also need to avoid unintentionally discriminating against applicants in protected categories. Employers can best balance the twin challenges of avoiding illegal discrimination while ferreting out job fit and commitment problems with a several stage hiring process.
Email applicants a questionnaire
We recommend that our clients initially email applicants fifteen to thirty questions aimed at job fit, motivation, and job satisfaction. Not only does an email questionnaire screen in or weed out great or poor applicants, the email questionnaire process also saves our employers time and effort by avoiding in-person interviews with applicants whose written responses show problems and applicants who lack sufficient work ethic and job-interest to respond to the email questionnaire.
Samples email questions include:
- What puts you in the job market?
- If you were offered two jobs, what are the factors that would lead you to choose one job over the other?
- What qualities do you hope to see/hope not to see in a supervisor?
- What’s your experience with working in a fast paced environment? With working under pressure?
- When we ask them, what will your former supervisors say when describing you?
- If you took this job hoping it was an “A” job, what would be the small things that might disappoint you that would make it an A- or B+ job?
- Please describe your work ethic:
- What attracts you to this job?
- What salary are you hoping for? What salary is too low?
What to address in the in-person interviews
In follow-up in-person interviews, we recommend asking applicants to take the interviewer on a guided tour of their resume, starting four jobs back. This process helps prospective employers gain a sense of what the applicants wants in a next job and also gives them a sense of how the applicant reacts in job situations, revealing applicants who blame past supervisors or co-workers for “making them” leave jobs in preference to taking responsibility for their own part in problems.
Next, employees who interview wonderfully yet fail to live up to their promises generally fall into one of three categories: (1) those not well-matched to a job; (2) those who lie well; and (3) those who don’t know themselves well and so present a falsely positive picture of their skills and qualities.
While interviewing often helps you decipher applicants who fall into the first category, only thorough reference checking helps you avoid the second two categories of poor hires.
How to conduct effective reference checking
Effective reference checking depends on your ability to get through to those who have the information you need. If an applicant offers you references from personal friends or coworkers rather than supervisory references, consider this a red flag. If you plan to supervise this employee and want the real scoop, you need to interview your prospective applicant’s past two or three supervisors.
Once you get the supervisor on the phone, ask questions that go beneath the surface. You can ask questions such as:
- How does this employee relate to her supervisor?
- How does this employee handle conflict situations?
- What types of work situations de-motivate this employee?
- Tell me about this employee ‘chatting’ with coworkers.
If you reach a supervisor who won’t talk or says company policies prohibit giving reference information, say, “Okay, there’s one interesting question that isn’t about the applicant but more about the supervisor” and then pause. I’ve never had a situation in which the supervisor didn’t say, “So, what’s the question?”
Then ask, “What type of supervisor would be the best match for this employee?”
This question gleans answers such as “someone who doesn’t try to supervise,” “I know I’ve never met the person who might be right” and “Mother Theresa.”
Conclusion
Do you want to hire the right employee? Start with email questions, follow-up with probing in-person questions, and detailed reference checks. Through this process, you’ll find an engaged, committed employee that cares enough about your job to work hard and succeed.
| Editor’s picks: | ||
 12 big blunders caught on resumes by hiring managers
|
 The simple secret to hiring a great receptionist |
 Why you should avoid hiring your clone |