The Candidate Experience Survey

The Candidate Experience Survey

The “Candidate Experience” is the latest trend in recruitment, and it’s an odd concept that shows how quickly we, collectively, are losing our touch with humanity. The “Candidate Experience” is intended to measure a company’s recruitment process by asking potential candidates for feedback. Fundamentally, however, it in itself lacks humanity and balance. For example, I received a questionnaire after not proceeding to the next round in an interview process. First, a question – why would I fill out this questionnaire? What’s in it for the candidate that didn’t get moved on in the recruitment process? But, lets continue, the first question in the questionnaire is: Based on your experience interviewing, how likely are you to encourage other people to apply?

On the surface, that may seem like a fair question, but here’s the issue.

  1. I am still trying to understand why I was not moved to the next round. I have yet to receive feedback. Why would I bother giving the company feedback when I received none?
  2. I gave the company hours of my time, and now they want more of my time. (In other words, they are asking more from me than they were willing to give me…and I’m not talking about a job; I’m talking about the time it takes to write feedback (or give something other than a form response) – something I can learn for the next opportunity.
  3. The Survey itself is flawed—I don’t know how I could score higher than the lowest score, as I’m not interviewing for the experience of interviewing but for the job, which I didn’t get. And I wouldn’t want anyone to have an empty interview with no feedback or discussion and, as far as I know, no chance of landing a job.
  4. I’m not submitting the survey for the above reasons—which is the best I can do for this Company. So, if my experience and rationale are consistent with all other candidates who didn’t get moved on, the only survey results they’ll receive are people who did get the offer—which completely skews the actual metrics this Survey is trying to obtain. The candidate’s experience is not represented in the survey; the future employee experience is.

Learning: Companies are attempting to ask more of candidates while giving them less, calling this “The Candidate Experience.” If you want to improve the experience, talk to the consumers of that experience. If it’s more than just the illusion of caring, that is.

Correcting Annual Feedback

Correcting Annual Feedback

Annual reviews need to change. They are flawed. In many cases, it’s the only time an employee receives feedback from their manager. It’s also typically wrapped into pay raises. Which dramatically skews the feedback process. How can you honestly give or receive feedback when each party is financially incentivized to play out a character?

Do you want a better way? Feedback should be freely given and received weekly, monthly, and quarterly. If there is an annual review process, it should be considered feedback confirmation with minimal NEW feedback. This would result in a conversation about pay based on a year’s performance and feedback. Not a tap dance around a 3% raise.

Learning: Feedback should be a constant part of your employee dynamics. If you want to improve, seek feedback by asking specific questions like “What’s one thing I can improve upon?” regularly.

The Elephant in the Room

The Elephant in the Room

We’ve all been in meetings where the audience is aware of a topic actively being avoided. I have always found that interesting – why would we not talk about what we all need to discuss? Well, it turns out that there are two main reasons:

  1. We are actively trying to avoid a topic either because we are ashamed, it’s too hard, or there is a culture of not talking about hard things.
  2. What we think is ‘the elephant in the room’ is only ‘the elephant in the room’ to us. To everyone else, it’s just a cute elephant stuffy.

Learning: Spending a few moments understanding why a topic is not being discussed can prevent you from accidentally sabotaging a meeting or your reputation. Conversely, it will provide you with the depth you need to ensure the topic can be addressed in the most productive way.

Feedback Fairness

Feedback Fairness

Feedback should always be given and received freely. That’s why I’m a massive fan of 360 feedback—feedback from peers, managers, staff, etc. What makes that work is that there is a natural trust in the feedback system itself. On the other hand, online reviews (of restaurants, in this case) should always be questioned because the reviewing system is flawed. A reviewer does not need to prove that they ate at the restaurant or that they even were in the same city as the restaurant. A quick scan of the reviewers feedback can tell you a lot – and 9 times out of 10, they do not give positive feedback. Imagine, in a work scenario, if a coworker gave negative reviews 90% of the time. Would that person still have a job? It’s just not the same for online review tools.

References and Resources

Getting 360-Degree Feedback Right by Maury Peiperl/Harvard Business Review; Type: Article

Not Aligned. Definitely, Not Aligned

Not Aligned. Definitely, Not Aligned

Introverts and most people would not make a peep in this kind of environment. Whether an All Hands or a Summit or something of that scale, silence does not translate to agreement. A more personal and “in the field” approach will suit you better if you seek real alignment.

Navigating feedback takes a lot of work as a leader. You are there to make the tough calls, not abdicate responsibility. Conversely, you must gain inclusion to have lasting change, so feedback is necessary.

Learning: Leaders who assume feedback will come from the dynamics of large groups are likely not seeking feedback at all.

Shields Up: How NOT to Approach Feedback

Shields Up: How NOT to Approach Feedback

Receiving feedback is incredibly difficult. A very common response to receiving feedback is to dismiss it. Immediately. In some cases, If the employee receiving the feedback believes that their identity is being attacked, then it will not stick unless they release their grip on their identity parameters. Or, and I’m being sarcastic here, work through the below steps (preferably around 2-4 am). For a more in-depth toolkit and understanding of giving and receiving feedback, I recommend picking up the book Thanks for the Feedback by Sheila Heen and Douglas Stone.

Learning: To help navigate feedback blockers, approach receiving feedback as an opportunity to learn more about your identity construct.

References and Resources

Thanks for the Feedback by Sheila Heen and Douglas Stone; Type: Book

Eventually, It Comes Back

Eventually, It Comes Back

Blame has no place in business and, specifically, no place in leadership. It’s one thing to seek reasons for mistakes or bad feedback, but finding blame is an entirely different thing. As a leader, if you are looking for blame, always start with yourself. Your team will respect you more and be more likely to emulate that behavior when they make mistakes.

Conclusion: Modeling a healthy demeanor towards feedback says a lot about a leader.

References and Resources

Extreme Ownership by Jocko Willink and Leif Babin; Type: Book

Brené Brown on Blame by Brené Brown; Type: Video

Does this resonate with you? How do handle receiving feedback? Have you seen examples (either in yourself or in others) where blame has been used to deflect instead of reflect? If so, we’d love to hear from you.

Some Advice is Easy to Ignore

Some Advice is Easy to Ignore

I want to think that you can receive actionable feedback from anywhere. But that’s simply not true. In our busy lives and even busier minds, we only listen to feedback from sources we respect. And like. That’s a mistake. The best feedback comes from places you least expect (and sometimes don’t even respect). It’s a tough balance, but there are people out there who do actually want you to be your best.

Learning: Listen and measure all feedback you get – you’ll be better for it.