The Best Resume Is the Wrong Hire
Zack AllenMay 4, 20262:29
After 500+ interviews, the hires I enjoy talking to beat the hires with the best resumes.
In my recruitment firm, I've taken over 500 interviews for our clients, and I've developed a process for how they're run.
Before I started hiring for my team, I'd never been interviewed and never applied for a job. I went in with very little context. My idea of a good interview was a good conversation to understand who someone is.
That's what our process grew into: getting to know someone for who they are.
Interviews as character due diligence
A big part of the interviews we run for clients is due diligence on character. I'm very focused on hiring for character and attitude.
My rule: if a candidate could have prepared for the question beforehand, it's not a good interview question. I want answers they give off the cuff, specific to them, not something they got by asking ChatGPT what they might be asked.
Skills on paper vs. a good conversation
No matter how good the resume is, if I don't enjoy interviewing someone, they won't do well on my team.
Sometimes a client does a follow-up interview and says, "Their resume is definitely good. They definitely have the skills. They were okay in the interview." My response is that it's probably not a good hire.
So much of a successful hire comes down to communication: how often you talk, and how well information passes from you to them. If I dread getting on a call with a team member, we won't get anything done.
On the other hand, if someone has no background but I enjoy talking to them, I can transfer what I know and they receive it well. That goes great.
Both kinds of hires
I've hired people in both buckets. Some looked excellent on paper but I didn't enjoy talking to them. Others had no skills on paper but I enjoyed every conversation.
The second group has always outperformed.
I think about it as leadership and empowerment. When I enjoy talking with someone, I'm far better at empowering them, rooting for them and giving them the information they need.
And no matter how good someone's previous training was, they'll have to learn my way of doing things. I'm particular about how work gets done, and I don't delegate anything until I understand it well enough to hold someone accountable. The only way I can pass that on is 1-on-1, which means the conversation has to work.
Transcript
Show the full transcript
In my recruitment firm, I've taken over 500 interviews for our clients and I have a certain science to how the interviews are done. Now, before hiring for my own team, I've never had an interview and never applied for a job. And so, I didn't have much context going into it. So, my idea for a good interview was having a good conversation to understand who they were. And that's what our process has really developed into on interviews is getting to know someone for who they truly are.
I think a large part of the interviews that we take for our clients for these roles is a form of due diligence into their character. Like I'm very focused on character hiring and attitude hiring. An interview is a great way for me to see how they are. Like my philosophy towards it is if I'm asking questions that they could have prepared for beforehand, it's not a good interview question. I want stuff that they're answering off the cuff and is very specific to them, not a ask chatbt.
Hey, what are the questions that I might be asked on this interview? I also think that no matter how good their resume is, if I don't enjoy interviewing them, they're not going to do well on my team. Like, we'll have clients who will do follow-up interviews and the client will be like, "Yeah, they're they're they're resume definitely good. They definitely have the skills, but, you know, they were they were okay in the interview." And I'm like, "Well, then I don't think it's a good hire." Because a large part of a successful hire is that communication cadence, the amount of information and the my ability to transfer information to that other person.
If I dread hopping on a call with my team member, we're not going to get anything done. If I'm like, "Oh, yeah, I got to, you know, hop on with Cindy again today. Hopefully, she'll she'll she'll be more fun today." This is not going to go well. But on the other hand, if someone has no background, but I really enjoy talking to them on the call, I'm able to transfer my information to them well and they receive it well, then this is going to go great.
I've had hires in both buckets. Ones where they were extremely good on paper, but I didn't enjoy talking to, and ones where they didn't have any skills on paper, but I really did enjoy talking to. And this category has always outperformed. I think the biggest reason why is I'm able to, you know, if we put it into two categories, leadership and empowerment, I'm able to empower someone and root for them and give them the information they need so much better when I enjoy speaking with them.
No matter how good the training is that they had previously, I'm so particular with the way I do things and I don't delegate things unless I can understand it to the point of accountability. And so they're always going to have to learn my method of doing things and my spin on it, which I can only transfer to them oneonone.
