What do buying a car and hiring a candidate have in common?

The answer: The importance of taking a “test drive” before buying!

If you are like me, meeting with a car salesman is perceived as an experience with a slightly scented flavor of mistrust.

When I was a sales manager on the road, I had several opportunities to experience purchasing vehicles.

I always imagined that the interests of vehicle salespeople were not aligned with mine.

I was preoccupied with the belief that they were too sales-driven and that their priorities would overshadow my interests and needs.

So, I admit to having a preconceived negative stereotype of the car salesman, and if my first subjective impression of a salesperson suggests even the slightest bit of this stereotype, I turn on my heels before he or she can say another word to me.

My decision not to buy is made, and set in stone, long before I even give myself a chance to check if my first impressions are justified.

On the other hand, if this salesperson surprises me from the start with an approach and an appearance that does not appeal to this stereotype, he is very likely to gain my trust… even if he is not necessarily deserving of it.

From that moment on, regardless of the quality of the product, I am already a step closer to making a purchase.

However, regardless of the quality of the salesperson or the car, the test drive has always made a significant difference in my final decision.

By analogy, this story contains many of the principles and pitfalls of hiring.

It is a sale where résumés, recommendation letters, interviews, and psychometric tests are to the selection process what spec sheets, promotional brochures, salesperson performance, and independent expert reviews are to buying a car.

It is important, before committing to purchasing a car, to consider a body of information from several different sources.

But it is the test drive that allows you to make the most informed decision possible for this major purchase.

These principles are also essential for selecting a candidate when hiring for a key position in your organization.

Take your candidates for a “test drive” before hiring them

Comparative analogy of information sources:

We all have first impressions, whether positive or negative, regarding people we meet for the first time during social occasions.

There are certainly some of these strangers with whom we felt a greater affinity.

That's normal and expected!

Now, is it possible that you experience similar reactions the moment you meet candidates for the first time in a hiring process?

Inevitably, right?

Can these normal inner reactions influence the course of the selection process?

The answer is not as simple as you think, yet the potential for influence remains very real.

Let me illustrate this with a simple case:

There are two candidates applying for a position, and you are meeting them for the first time as a recruiter.

Which of these two candidates gives you the best first impression?

It must surely be candidate #2 since he has the best experience; he is considered an expert in his field and benefits from an impressive network capable of drumming up business... Oh, no?

Okay, I set a trap for you!

It could be either or neither, depending on your specific internal state. Regardless, we reassure ourselves by telling ourselves we are professionals and that our first impressions will not influence the process. Right?

Now imagine that, for no obvious reason, candidate #2 triggers an unpleasant feeling in you, more or less consciously, similar to what I feel when I meet a car salesperson. What are his chances of getting the job now?

Experience suggests that his chances have likely decreased. Be honest, despite all your efforts, your unconscious unease is likely to be betrayed by a subtly nuanced attitude towards him, and your perceptions of him will possibly be less favorable compared to candidate #1.

In addition, the very subtle nuances in attitude you display towards him are likely to be unconsciously perceived and could impact the quality of his answers to your questions, further disadvantaging him in your perception of his interview performance.

Here we have an example of the real risks of unconscious cognitive biases, which too often influence candidate performance and selection.

I have often seen several of my colleagues miss opportunities to hire the best candidate due to these unconscious influences directing their attention, attitudes, and preconceived ideas. Sometimes, though rarely confessed, their choice proved disappointing once the candidate was hired.

If they had been able to take a test drive as we do with cars before buying, their choice might have been different. Whatever the most seasoned recruiters say, the hiring decision remains one influenced by emotions on both sides.

Due to several unconscious cognitive biases accompanied by some emotional charge, the interview will too often only serve to validate the first impression.

Based on these facts, I learned that some candidates excel at mastering interviews. They have developed the talent to win over employers during the selection process.

Their entire “marketing package” is a major success, from the quality of their résumés, references, and how they present and behave in interviews.

By contrast, there are candidates whose “marketing package” is not as dazzling, and they do not stand out as much in interviews.

Many of these may have the best skills and assets needed for the job, which might not come across during an interview.

And unfortunately, the latter too often lose ground to talented interview masters who are not necessarily the best choice. This “contrast” effect shadows excellent candidates who were less spectacular.

What are we looking for: the best performance in an interview, or the best candidate for the job?

I understand that the majority of employers, possibly because it is less costly and simpler, still use structural interviews as their primary or sole assessment tool when hiring candidates.

Note that a bad choice always carries a high cost and is certainly fraught with consequences.

As far as I'm concerned, my personal experience (joining that of many colleagues) aligns with academic theory, supported by a wealth of quantified observations in the field and documented by many specialized authors, all confirming that very little correlation exists between interview performance and the ability to perform the actual tasks of the job.

This is particularly true given the abundance of online tutorials available on “How to perform in an interview?”, “How to answer interview questions?”, or “How to prepare to win the interview?”.

Not to mention all the professional firms that thrive on this. Do your own research online and you will see! This method succeeds in structuring a “marketing package” for the candidate, whose main objective is to influence you favorably during interviews. Here, a test drive could be very useful to guide your choice.

The biases illustrated above are just a few of an impressive number of unconscious cognitive biases that exert their influence on us during selection interviews.

Whether we unconsciously seek a candidate who resembles us (mirror bias); whether we are influenced by regional accents, age, gender, or ethnic origin; the number of unconscious cognitive biases influencing us is incalculable, and we cannot know them all.

Even if we are aware of these biases, they, coupled with our emotional response, will inevitably influence us, despite ourselves.

How do we protect ourselves from these inevitable and potentially harmful influences? By managing them using a structured selection approach and diversified assessment tools.

Our structured selection approach:

This is exactly what PRsPectives offers through Hire Results Ltd.’s patented methodology.

Before getting to the “test drive,” it is important to mention that our approach fits within a system of objectively weighted result processing.

Consistent and fair, Hire Results Ltd.’s methodology compiles a distinct profile for each assessed candidate. Housed in a platform, all results of all assessed candidates can be systematically compared at a glance.

Our approach will definitely delay and significantly reduce the influence of emotions and biases. Additionally, assessments from the employer can also be added and integrated into this organized structure, our web platform, which is accessible to the employer in real-time throughout the process.

The “Test Drive”: evaluating a candidate's ability to perform in the actual functions of the job:

Yes, finally, we arrive at the essential experience of the rigorous “test drive.”

The test drive, as proposed by Hire Results Ltd.’s patented methodology, strategically focuses on 20% of the key tasks responsible for 80% of reaching the position's objectives (Pareto's 80/20 Law of Distribution).

The goal is to objectively evaluate, through participative experience, each candidate's ability to perform the actual tasks of the desired role, customized for the occasion and identified as essential to mastering the position.

This is the essence of a rigorous test drive!

The test drive will allow you to confirm or refute the impressions generated throughout the process.

Very often, we realize, with disappointment, that the performance of the talented interview professionals, who had initially impressed us so much, does not meet expectations.

Conversely, we may be surprised to see the best performances come from candidates who did not initially impress because they were overshadowed by the experts of charm.

Hiring mistakes can be very harmful and costly for any business, regardless of its size. Helping you manage risk while raising your team's productivity is the mandate we have set for ourselves and offer to you.

Hop in with us and take your candidates for a “test drive” before hiring them.