Each function within a company measures the quality of its products or services in a certain way, with the exception of HR and especially recruiting. However, it is very unprofessional to assume we are providing high quality output if it can't be measured. Nor can you improve what you do not measure.
This is another topic John Sullivan focuses on in a recent article on ERE.net, where he suggests the quality of hire should be measured for three fundamental reasons.
1. Improving performance of newly hired employees clearly shows the influence of recruitment on business results.
2. Improving a process is impossible without first measuring the quality of its results.
3. By learning to use data, you will gain more influence over managerial decisions.
A simple model
The most common arguments against measuring the quality of hire say that quality in this area cannot be defined or that it is too time-consuming and expensive. Even if recruiters have accurate data, they will not have total control over recruiting the final person. HR professionals do not work very well with numbers and their assessments will always be only subjective ... According to Sullivan, all these excuses are nonsense. If you are looking for a way to measure the quality of hire easily, cheaply and objectively, try the following model.
1. Prepare a survey of the performance of newly recruited staff
Introduce an electronic survey to be completed by the managers of these employees. Collect feedback after six and 12 months. Evaluate employees in individual skills on a scale from 1 to 10. Ask also whether the managers would hire the employees again, using the same evaluation scale. For more detailed results, connect this performance evaluation with the one which takes place on the level of the whole company.
2. Record who has left
Monitor the voluntary turnover rate after one, six and 12 months. Compare the results year on year in the individual categories of jobs.
3. Record the reasons for leaving
Monitor whether new hires left the company of their own accord or were forced to leave within the first 12 months. Again, compare the results year on year in the individual categories of jobs.
4. Connect performance with recruiting
Once you know the individuals with the best performance in the various categories of jobs, focus on which parts of the recruitment process were different in their case from the newly hired employees with the worst performance. It may be a matter of selection criteria, sources, interview questions, managers, etc.
You should also measure the quality of hire in the case of employees recommended by employment agencies.
"The time for excuses is over, and it’s no longer acceptable to whine about how difficult it is to measure new hire quality, when everyone else has found a way to measure quality long ago. And by the way, if it takes longer than six months to develop a measuring process, you are part of the problem," Sullivan concludes.
Do you measure the quality of hire in your company?
-kk-