Is Quality of Hire a Valid Measure?

Quality of hire is a hot topic right now, sometimes discussed as the definitive metric for recruiting effectiveness. We have had doubts that it is a reliable measurement. Tim Sackett, President at HRU Technical Resources, wrote in his blog on August 17 that the quality of hire is meaningless. He cited five reasons why 40% of practitioners who said QOH is the top metric for 2016 don’t know what they are talking about. Here’s our summary of his reasons: Almost nobody knows how to measure it. Everyone measures it differently. The measurement takes time, and there are too many variables over that time to pin the success or failure of recruiters. Neither is sourcing a reliable predictor. Most recruiting managers believe retention is a valid QOH measure. As Sackett says, they also “believe in purple squirrels.” We can sympathize with the recruiters. They have fallen prey to the same disease HR metrics have been dying from for 30 years. Too often, we settle on what is easy to measure rather than what is meaningful. These are the top three metrics for the quality of hire and why they don’t work. New hire performance evaluations. Who trusts performance evaluations? The most influential factor is the rater bias. New hire turnover. Are we to believe that culture, employee development, and working relationships are not the deciding factors? Hiring manager satisfaction. Do we let the manager who made the hiring decision rate the recruiter on the quality of that decision? A Different Perspective Robin Erickson, Ph.D., of Bersin by Deloitte brought a new perspective to the conversation. Her research found that the most influential predictor of recruiting’s performance is a strong relationship between the recruiter and the hiring manager. For us, that was true. We couldn’t imagine operating effectively without a strong working relationship. According to the research, a disconnect does exist in many organizations. Erickson offers excellent recommendations for improving the working relationship, but we remain skeptical about relying on hiring manager satisfaction unless we can validate the results with analytics. Here’s our big question: do you measure the quality of hire because you need to improve it or because you need a metric for recruiters? Wouldn’t you be much better off using metrics that measure recruiters, not your onboarding program, the judgment of your hiring managers, or your company culture? Continue reading:

Is Quality of Hire a Valid Measure? ranking

This blog ranks #696 in our Top E-Learning Blogs.

Copy and paste this code into any part of your blog to get a dynamic badge that automatically updates your rank every day.

Posts by Is Quality of Hire a Valid Measure?

We are updating our Privacy Policy, so please make sure you take a minute to review it. As of May 25, 2018 your continued use of our services will be subject to this new Privacy Policy.
Review Privacy Policy OK