#4 The Battle of Accountability
There are times when recruitment can seem like a battlefield. One of the most common complaints I hear as a recruiter is that we are constantly coming under attack from field staff, who believe they have found a parallel between the recruitment process and stumped campaign growth or poor staff retention.
I have seen many recruiters prepare to wage a war over these accusations, only to surrender due to their lack of preparation.
How can you fight your case, if you have nothing to shield you from the attack in the first place?
By no means do I think recruiters or field staff show up to work wearing camouflage or carrying pitchforks, however, regardless of the extreme, the battle of accountability is one of the most common I see.
After all, nobody likes to surrender when they feel like they're in the right.
So when you're in the midst of a battle, how do you achieve a ceasefire?
The answer is simple.
Firstly, as a recruiter, we have to acknowledge that sometimes, we make poor hiring decisions, but for the most part, if we know the team, the role, and the ideal candidate, we must be able to justify the decisions we make.
This is the best form of protection, but also, and most importantly, it's the best way to identify where we are able to improve, grow and develop our team so that the battle returns to where it's needed the most, the cause.
Accountability should not be shifted but shared. If at each step of our processes we are aware of our errors and wins, we can form the basis of a successful army of influencers, who can strategize as a team, to both grow and expand campaigns.
The easiest model of justification that I have found, is a clear and fair rating system for each step of the recruitment and training process.
If candidates are rated on their skills in the phone interview, face to face interview and the initial training period, we're able to see a clear picture of the candidate's overall performance. If in their interview's and first-day training, they are rated 9/10 by their manager and interviewer, but at the end of their first week they're rated at 3 by their team leader, the accountability can clearly be linked with the events of their first week on the field.
The shared accountability model means that we, as a collective, are able to conduct the training or skills development needed for, in this instance, the team leader who may be struggling.
This creates a much more harmonious and peaceful field structure, that doesn't work against recruitment, but with it, to make the team the best it can be.
So when the battle of accountability occurs, put down the pitchforks and make sure that you come prepared with constructive results and feedback to unify your field force and attack your problems together.