Why Interviewers Tend To Hire Themselves and What It Costs

By Patty Crabtree, CEO Lighthouse Consulting Partners

One of the most consistent patterns in hiring is also one of the least examined. Interviewers tend to respond more favorably to candidates who think, communicate, and approach problems the way they do. The decisive candidate feels confident and capable to the decisive interviewer. The methodical, detail-oriented candidate impresses the interviewer who values thoroughness above speed. The relationship-oriented candidate connects easily with the interviewer who leads the same way.

This is not bias in the way most people think of it. It does not require conscious preference or deliberate comparison. It happens naturally, quietly, and often without any awareness that it is occurring at all. And it has a significant impact on who gets hired, who gets passed over, and how well the resulting team actually functions.

Why This Happens

People tend to find comfort in familiarity. In an interview context, familiarity often comes in the form of shared work style. When a candidate processes information the way you do, frames problems the way you frame them, and communicates with a rhythm and directness that matches your own, the conversation flows easily. You feel understood. You find their answers clear and compelling. The interaction feels right in a way that is difficult to articulate but easy to act on.

The reverse is equally true. When a candidate thinks or communicates differently, the conversation can feel slightly off even when the candidate is highly capable. The more deliberate communicator may seem hesitant to the fast-moving interviewer. The candidate who needs to think before responding may appear uncertain to the interviewer who values quick answers. The big-picture thinker may frustrate the detail-oriented interviewer who wants specifics.

None of these impressions necessarily reflect the candidate’s actual capability. They reflect the gap between how the candidate naturally operates and how the interviewer naturally prefers to work. This is part of what is often described as the likability factor in hiring. But it runs deeper than personality. Much of what feels like personal connection in an interview is actually a response to shared work style.

What the Research Consistently Shows

Organizations spend significant time and resources developing job requirements, compensation structures, and onboarding programs. They spend far less time examining what actually happens inside the interview conversation itself. What happens is this: two people interact for period of time and one of them forms a judgment that is shaped as much by how comfortable the interaction felt as by what the candidate actually demonstrated.

Studies on interviewing consistently show that decisions are often made early in the conversation and that the remainder of the interview is spent confirming rather than testing that initial impression. When an interviewer is immediately comfortable with a candidate because of shared work style, that comfort becomes the lens through which everything else is interpreted. Strong answers are seen as confirmation of capability. Hesitant or inconsistent answers are forgiven or explained away. The result is a hiring decision that feels confident but may have very little to do with whether the candidate will actually succeed in the role.

The Cost to the Team

Beyond the individual hire, the cumulative effect of work style favoritism is a team that gradually becomes more homogeneous. Leaders who consistently prefer candidates who share their approach end up with teams that think alike, communicate alike, and solve problems alike. In the short term, this can feel efficient. Decisions move quickly. Communication feels smooth. There is rarely friction in how people work together.

In the longer term, homogeneous teams have well-documented limitations. They miss perspectives they are not naturally inclined to seek. They generate fewer genuinely different solutions to complex problems. They are less equipped to serve a diverse range of clients, stakeholders, and situations. And they are more vulnerable to shared blind spots that no one on the team is positioned to identify.

The candidate who would have brought something genuinely different to the team was often passed over not because they lacked capability but because the interviewer never felt quite comfortable enough to see past the difference.

What Interview Discipline Actually Means

Interview discipline is frequently discussed in terms of process: structured questions, consistent scoring, defined criteria, multiple interviewers. These elements matter and they work. But the foundation of interview discipline is something more personal and more difficult. It is the willingness to understand your own work style well enough to recognize when it is influencing your evaluation of someone else.

An interviewer who values direct communication and quick decisions needs to recognize that a more deliberate, methodical candidate may be equally capable, simply different in approach. An interviewer who leads collaboratively needs to recognize that a more independent candidate is not necessarily a poor team player. An interviewer who processes information quickly needs to recognize that a candidate who pauses to think before answering is not uncertain. They are thorough.

This kind of self-awareness does not come naturally to most people because the very tendencies that shape our interviewing preferences are the same tendencies we experience as simply normal. They feel like the standard against which others should be measured, not as one approach among many equally valid ones.

Building a More Disciplined Process

The most effective interview processes build in deliberate counterweights to the natural pull of work style favoritism. A few approaches that make a meaningful difference:

  • Define what you are actually evaluating before the interview begins. Not general qualities like communication or problem-solving, but specific behaviors that predict success in this role, with this team and in this environment. When evaluators know exactly what they are looking for, they are less susceptible to being swayed by how comfortable the interaction felt.
  • Include interviewers with different work styles in the evaluation. What one interviewer reads as hesitation, another may recognize as depth. What one reads as vagueness, another may recognize as big-picture thinking. Multiple perspectives help surface what a single evaluator might miss or misread.
  • Separate the conversation from the evaluation. Many interviewers form and share impressions immediately after the interview when the emotional experience of the interaction is still most present. Building in time and structure for individual evaluation before group discussion reduces the influence of one interviewer’s comfort level on the rest of the panel.

The Interview as a Two-Way Assessment

Effective interviewing requires genuine curiosity about how a candidate thinks and operates, not just whether they think and operate similarly to you. When interviewers approach the conversation with that curiosity, something useful happens. They ask different questions. They listen differently. They probe where there is a difference rather than concluding that a difference is a deficiency.

The candidate who communicates differently, processes information differently, or approaches problems differently may be exactly what the team needs. Recognizing that requires interviewers to understand their own tendencies well enough to hold them lightly during the conversation.

That is what interview discipline looks like at its most meaningful level. Not just a structured process, though structure helps. But a genuine willingness to separate comfort from competence and to evaluate the candidate in front of you, not the version of yourself you would most easily recognize.

The best hiring decisions are rarely the most comfortable ones. They are the most informed ones.

 

Lighthouse Consulting Partners, LLC

Testing Division provides a variety of services, including an In-depth Work Style Personality assessment for new hires, staff development, career guidance and team building. Our assessment  is available in 19 different languages. In addition, we offer skills testing and 360 assessments.

Business Consulting for Higher Productivity Division provides leadership and management coaching, a variety of workshops including team building, communication styles, stress management, leadership training, staff planning, operations, and much more.

For more information on our services, please go to www.LighthouseConsulting.com or contact us at Info@LighthouseConsulting.com.

Permission is needed from Lighthouse Consulting Partners, LLC to reproduce any portion provided in this article. © 2026

What We Mistake for Leadership Potential and What Actually Predicts It

By Patty Crabtree, CEO Lighthouse Consulting Partners

Leadership potential is one of the most important things an organization can try to identify. It is also one of the most consistently misjudged qualities regardless of whether the search is happening in an interview room or across a current team.

Organizations face this challenge from two directions. The first is external: hiring leaders from outside who can bring new capability and perspective. The second is internal: identifying employees ready to take on greater responsibility and make the transition from individual contributor to leader. Both decisions carry significant consequences. And in both cases, organizations tend to make the same fundamental mistake confusing the qualities that create strong impressions with the qualities that actually predict long-term leadership effectiveness.

Understanding that distinction and building the discipline to act on it, is one of the most consequential things any organization can develop.

What the Interview Reveals and What It Misses

A well-conducted interview tells you a great deal. You learn how someone thinks on their feet, how they communicate their experience, how they engage under structured conditions. These are real signals.

What an interview reveals less reliably is how someone leads when the situation is genuinely difficult, when a decision is unpopular, when a team member is struggling, when the energy and preparation that accompany an interview are long gone. The interview is a snapshot taken under favorable conditions. Leadership plays out over months and years under conditions that are far less controlled.

Relying too heavily on interview performance to predict leadership effectiveness is one of the most common hiring mistakes organizations make. Confidence is visible and compelling. Articulate communicators stand out. People who project certainty and ease create positive impressions. These qualities matter but they are not the same as leadership.

What Current Performance Reveals and What It Misses

Strong performance in a current role tells you that someone is capable, reliable, and committed. These are genuinely important qualities. What strong individual performance reveals less reliably is how someone will lead when the role requires an entirely different set of behaviors.

The skills that make someone an exceptional individual contributor are valuable. They are also different from the skills that make someone an effective leader. The engineer who solves the most complex problems may struggle when the job becomes helping others solve problems rather than solving them directly. The top salesperson who consistently exceeds their numbers may find it deeply uncomfortable to invest in the development of a struggling team member. The detail-oriented analyst who produces flawless work may frustrate a team that needs direction more than precision.

None of this reflects a failure of character or effort. It reflects a mismatch between what someone does naturally well and what the new role actually requires.

The Traps Organizations Fall Into

In external hiring, the most common mistake is the confidence trap. Confidence is one of the most frequently misread qualities in leadership assessment. A confident candidate who lacks self-awareness may perform well in structured interviews while struggling significantly when the role requires adaptability, accountability, or the ability to develop others. Confidence without competence tends to become more visible not less as leadership responsibilities increase.

In internal promotion, the most common mistake is the top performer trap. Organizations promote their best individual performers and expect them to become their best leaders. This approach is understandable as high performers are visible, their contributions are measurable, and promoting them feels like a natural reward. The problem is that individual performance and leadership effectiveness draw on fundamentally different capabilities.

In both cases, the underlying error is the same: mistaking what is easy to see for what is actually predictive.

What Actually Predicts Leadership Effectiveness

The qualities that most reliably predict whether someone will lead effectively are often harder to observe than strong interview performance or impressive metrics. They require deliberate attention and the right kinds of questions.

Consistency. Trust is built through consistent behavior not through impressive moments but through reliable, predictable action over time. Whether evaluating an external candidate or an internal employee, the question is whether their behavior holds across different circumstances, different audiences, and different levels of pressure. Inconsistency between what someone says and what they do erodes trust quietly and often invisibly until the damage is significant.

Self-awareness. Leaders who understand their own patterns with how they communicate, how they make decisions, how they respond under pressure, how their behavior affects others are significantly better positioned to grow and lead effectively. Self-awareness is not the same as self-doubt. It is the capacity to see oneself clearly enough to make intentional choices about how to show up. In an interview it shows up in how candidates discuss their own limitations. In a current employee it shows up in how they receive and act on feedback.

How they develop others. Leadership effectiveness is ultimately measured not only by what a leader accomplishes directly but by what they make possible in the people around them. Leaders who understand the strengths of their team, who invest in others’ growth, and who find genuine satisfaction in the success of their colleagues build organizations that outlast any single contribution they could make individually. Whether you are interviewing a candidate or observing a current employee, notice how they talk about the people around them with specificity and generosity, or primarily in reference to their own contributions.

How they handle being wrong. One of the most reliable predictors of leadership growth is how someone responds when their approach is not working. Leaders who can recognize when they are off course, seek input, and change direction demonstrate the adaptive capacity that long-term effectiveness requires. Those who defend their position at the expense of the outcome tend to carry that pattern into leadership where the stakes are higher and the consequences extend to an entire team.

What to Look For

In an external interview, look for patterns rather than single impressive answers. Ask for a second example when a candidate gives a compelling response genuine competence holds up across multiple situations while strong presentation skills reveal their limits more quickly. Listen for how candidates describe other people. How they talk about former colleagues and managers reveals a great deal about their interpersonal awareness and their tendency to take ownership or assign blame. Ask what they would approach differently today and listen for genuine reflection rather than a well-rehearsed answer.

In assessing internal candidates, notice how the employee shows up in group settings. Do they create space for others or primarily fill it? Pay attention to how they handle feedback. Do they approach it with curiosity or defensiveness? Observe how they behave under pressure. Leadership amplifies existing tendencies. The employee who becomes less communicative or more reactive under stress will likely bring those same patterns to a leadership role where the pressures are greater and the consequences extend to an entire team.

In both cases, have honest conversations about what leadership actually involves before any offer or promotion decision is made. A clear-eyed discussion about the shift from individual contribution to people development, accountability, and sustained consistency reveals a great deal about whether someone is genuinely ready or simply ready for the next step.

The Cost of Getting It Wrong

A failed leadership hire or promotion is rarely quiet. It affects the individual placed in the role who often finds themselves in a position that does not draw on their strengths. It affects the team which now reports to someone learning a fundamentally different job while trying to lead effectively. And it affects the organization which must invest significant time and resources supporting a struggling leader or make the difficult decision to move them out of a role they should not have been placed in.

The alternative is not to avoid external hiring or to stop promoting from within. Both are essential to organizational health. The alternative is to develop the discipline to identify leadership potential with the same rigor applied to assessing technical performance or interview presentation to look deliberately for the behavioral patterns that predict effectiveness not just the qualities that make someone visible.

The Leadership Identification Challenge

Whether the search is happening across an interview table or across a current team, the fundamental challenge is the same: separating what is easy to see from what actually predicts how someone will lead.

The best external candidates and the best internal candidates are not always the ones who impress most immediately. They are often the ones whose patterns across multiple conversations, across different situations, across how they talk about others and handle difficulty point most consistently toward the qualities leadership actually requires.

That kind of identification takes discipline. It takes the right questions. And it takes a genuine commitment to understanding people more deeply than a single conversation or a performance review typically allows.

That deeper understanding is where the best leadership decisions begin.

 

Lighthouse Consulting Partners, LLC

Testing Division provides a variety of services, including an In-depth Work Style Personality assessment for new hires, staff development, career guidance and team building. Our assessment  is available in 19 different languages. In addition, we offer skills testing and 360 assessments.

Business Consulting for Higher Productivity Division provides leadership and management coaching, a variety of workshops including team building, communication styles, stress management, leadership training, staff planning, operations, and much more.

For more information on our services, please go to www.LighthouseConsulting.com or contact us at Info@LighthouseConsulting.com.

Permission is needed from Lighthouse Consulting Partners, LLC to reproduce any portion provided in this article. © 2026

Who Will This Person Be on Your Team Not Just in the Interview?

By Patty Crabtree, CEO Lighthouse Consulting Partners

Many hiring managers have this experience. A candidate walks into an interview prepared, polished and ready to make a good impression. They communicate confidently, provide thoughtful examples and describe their accomplishments with ease. Everyone leaves the interview feeling good.

But there is a question that often gets overlooked: “Who will this person actually be once they become part of your team?”

The interview gives you a glimpse of a candidate under very specific conditions. They know they are being evaluated. They have likely prepared for the questions. They are focused on presenting themselves in the best possible light. Your workplace will be very different.

There will be competing priorities, difficult customers, tight deadlines, disagreements with coworkers, unexpected changes, feedback they don’t want to hear and decisions that don’t have an obvious right answer.

The real hiring question isn’t simply, “Did this person interview well?”

It is: “How is this person likely to think, communicate, make decisions, and interact with others when they are no longer trying to impress us?”

The Interview Is a Performance By Design

Interviews are, by nature, a controlled environment. Candidates are prepared, motivated to make a good impression, and typically on their best behavior. That’s not a flaw to fix; it’s simply the nature of the format. The problem arises when hiring teams treat interview behavior as a reliable preview of day-to-day team behavior, rather than as one narrow data point.

Team behavior shows up differently. It shows up in how someone reacts when a project is behind schedule and tempers are short. It shows up in whether they speak up in a meeting where their idea might get challenged or stay quiet to avoid friction. It shows up in what they do when a teammate takes credit for their work or when they are the one who disagrees with the group consensus. None of that is visible in a 45-minute conversation designed to showcase strengths.

Look Beyond the Candidate’s Story

One of the biggest challenges in interviewing is that we naturally respond to a good story. A candidate tells us about a difficult situation they successfully navigated. They explain what happened, describe the actions they took, and finish with a positive outcome. It sounds great. But the outcome isn’t necessarily the most important part of the story.

Listen for the thinking and behavior behind it.

  • How did they decide what to do?
  • What information did they consider?
  • Did they involve others or primarily rely on their own judgment?
  • How did they respond when someone disagreed?
  • What did they do when their original approach didn’t work?
  • What did they learn from the experience?

These details begin to reveal patterns. And patterns are much more useful than isolated stories when you’re trying to predict how someone will operate on your team.

Three Questions That Matter More Than “Tell Me About a Time…”

Traditional behavioral interview questions ask candidates to narrate a past success. They’re useful but they’re also easy to prepare for and easy to answer in a flattering way. A more revealing approach asks candidates to describe patterns rather than isolated stories.

“How do you typically handle disagreement on a team?” Not “tell me about a conflict you resolved,” but the pattern itself. Do they lean toward avoiding friction, addressing it directly or something in between? There is no universally right answer here but there is a right or wrong answer for your team’s existing dynamic.

“What role do you naturally play in group settings?” Some people default to organizing the group, some to challenging assumptions, some to supporting others’ ideas, some to quietly executing. Knowing this in advance tells you not just whether the candidate is capable but where they will actually add value on your specific team.

“When conflict arises, what do others notice about you?” This question is deceptively powerful because it asks the candidate to imagine themselves from the outside. Self-aware candidates will often give you an honest, sometimes unflattering answer and that honesty is itself a signal worth weighing.

Why This Changes the Hiring Conversation

Bringing interpersonal style into the hiring process doesn’t mean deprioritizing skills or experience. It means adding a second lens alongside them. A technically excellent candidate who consistently avoids conflict may be a poor fit for a team that relies on direct, fast feedback. A highly competitive candidate might thrive on a sales team built around individual performance but struggle on a cross-functional team that depends on shared credit and consensus-building.

The goal isn’t to find a single “ideal” interpersonal style. There isn’t one. The goal is fit: understanding how a candidate’s natural style will interact with the team they’re joining, the manager they will report to and the kind of work they will be doing. A cooperative style is an asset on a highly interdependent team and a potential bottleneck on one that needs fast, independent decisions. A direct, conflict-engaging style can be exactly what a stagnant team needs or exactly what an already-tense team doesn’t.

The Real Question Behind the Question

When you are evaluating a candidate, the question worth sitting with isn’t just “Can they do this job?” It’s “Who will this person be three months from now, in a meeting where things aren’t going well, surrounded by people they don’t yet know well enough to trust?” That is the version of the candidate who is actually going to show up on your team every day not the version who showed up for the interview.

Getting a clearer read on that version doesn’t require guesswork. It requires asking different questions and asking them with the specific intent of understanding a candidate’s default patterns rather than their prepared stories. The candidates who can answer honestly and specifically are often telling you exactly who they will be once they are on your team. The trick is knowing to ask.

The Person You Hire Becomes Part of the Team

Hiring isn’t simply about filling a position. It changes the team. The person you hire will influence how decisions are made, how problems are approached, how conflict is handled, how information is shared and how other people experience their work.

Instead of asking yourself: “Is this a good candidate?” A better question may be: “Is this the right candidate for this team and this role?”

That is why looking beyond the interview story matters. The question isn’t whether the candidate can tell a compelling story. It isn’t even whether they have the right experience.

The specific actions someone takes says a lot more than the story they weave. That is the person you are really hiring. The interview is the opportunity to discover their work style and how that will it will fit into your organization and team.

 

Lighthouse Consulting Partners, LLC

Testing Division provides a variety of services, including an In-depth Work Style Personality assessment for new hires, staff development, career guidance and team building. Our assessment  is available in 19 different languages. In addition, we offer skills testing and 360 assessments.

Business Consulting for Higher Productivity Division provides leadership and management coaching, a variety of workshops including team building, communication styles, stress management, leadership training, staff planning, operations, and much more.

For more information on our services, please go to www.LighthouseConsulting.com or contact us at Info@LighthouseConsulting.com.

Permission is needed from Lighthouse Consulting Partners, LLC to reproduce any portion provided in this article. © 2026

How Candidates Make Decisions and Why It Matters More Than Experience

By Patty Crabtree, CEO Lighthouse Consulting Partners

 

When organizations evaluate candidates, they often focus heavily on experience. How many years have they been in the industry? What positions have they held? What accomplishments are listed on their resume?

Experience certainly matters. Past experiences provide opportunities to develop skills, knowledge, and expertise. However, experience alone does not tell the full story.

Two candidates can have remarkably similar backgrounds yet perform very differently once hired.

Why? Because experience tells you what someone has done. Decision-making reveals how they think. And how someone thinks often has a greater impact on long-term success than the experiences listed on their resume.

Every Job Is a Series of Decisions

Whether someone is leading a company, managing a team, serving customers, or working independently, much of their day is spent making decisions.

Some decisions are small:

  • How to prioritize tasks
  • How to respond to an email
  • How to address a customer concern

Others carry greater significance:

  • Hiring decisions
  • Budget choices
  • Strategic initiatives
  • Personnel issues

The quality of those decisions influences productivity, relationships, performance, and outcomes. This is why understanding a candidate’s decision-making style can provide valuable insight into how they are likely to operate once they join your organization.

Fast vs. Deliberate Decision Makers

One of the most common differences among people is the speed at which they make decisions.

Some individuals are naturally fast decision makers. They prefer to gather enough information to move forward and adjust as needed along the way. They tend to be action-oriented and comfortable with uncertainty. In rapidly changing environments, this style can be a tremendous asset.

Others are more deliberate. They prefer to collect information, evaluate options, and carefully consider potential outcomes before acting. Their decisions are often thoughtful and well-researched, particularly when the stakes are high.

Neither style is inherently better. The effectiveness of a decision-making style depends heavily on the role and environment.

For example, a fast-moving sales environment may benefit from individuals who can make decisions quickly and adapt as conditions change. Conversely, roles involving compliance, financial oversight, quality control, or risk management may benefit from individuals who naturally slow down and consider details before acting.

The goal is not to determine whether a candidate is right or wrong. The goal is to understand how they naturally approach decisions and whether that approach aligns with the demands of the position.

Risk Tolerance Shapes Decisions

Another important factor is risk tolerance. Some people are comfortable taking calculated risks. They may be willing to try new approaches, challenge conventional thinking, or move forward without having every piece of information. Others prefer greater certainty. They are more likely to evaluate potential consequences, seek additional input, and minimize exposure before committing to a course of action.

Again, neither approach is inherently good or bad. Organizations need both perspectives. Innovation often requires people willing to take calculated risks. Stability often depends on individuals who carefully evaluate potential consequences.

The challenge for hiring managers is understanding where a candidate falls on that spectrum and whether it fits the role they are expected to perform.

A highly risk-tolerant individual may thrive in an entrepreneurial environment but become frustrated in a highly regulated organization. Likewise, a highly cautious individual may excel in a structured environment but struggle in a role that requires rapid experimentation and adaptation.

Understanding risk tolerance helps predict how someone will approach uncertainty, ambiguity, and change.

Experience Doesn’t Explain Judgment

One of the biggest hiring mistakes organizations make is assuming experience automatically equals good judgment.

Experience provides exposure. Judgment determines how someone uses that experience.

Consider two managers with identical backgrounds. Both have led teams for ten years. Both have achieved similar results. Both interview well. Yet one consistently builds trust, develops employees, and makes thoughtful decisions under pressure. The other struggles with conflict, reacts impulsively, and creates unnecessary turnover.

The difference is not experience. The difference is how they think. Judgment, self-awareness, and decision-making style often influence success more than years of experience alone.

Questions That Reveal Thinking Processes

Most interview questions focus on outcomes.

  • Tell me about a successful project.
  • Describe a challenge you overcame.
  • What accomplishment are you most proud of?

These questions often produce polished stories. To understand decision-making, interviewers need to explore the thinking behind those stories.

Instead of focusing only on what happened, ask questions that reveal how decisions were made.

Examples include:

  • What options were you considering at the time?
  • What factors influenced your decision?
  • What risks did you evaluate before moving forward?
  • What information did you wish you had?
  • Who did you involve in the decision-making process?
  • What made the decision difficult?

Looking back, would you make the same decision again?

These questions move candidates beyond prepared answers and into their actual thought process. That is often where the most valuable insight resides.

Listen for Patterns, Not Perfect Answers

Many interviewers evaluate decision-making based on whether they agree with the candidate’s choice.

A more effective approach is to evaluate the process.

  • Did the candidate gather relevant information?
  • Did they consider multiple perspectives?
  • Were they aware of potential risks?
  • Did they take ownership of the outcome?
  • Can they explain their reasoning clearly?

Strong decision-makers may arrive at different conclusions. What matters is whether there is a thoughtful and consistent process behind those conclusions.

As candidates share multiple examples, patterns begin to emerge.

  • Some consistently seek collaboration before acting.
  • Others rely primarily on independent judgment.
  • Some move quickly and adjust along the way.
  • Others spend more time evaluating before committing.

These patterns often provide more predictive value than any single answer.

How People Prioritize Matters Too

Decision-making and prioritization are closely connected. Every day, employees must determine:

  • What deserves immediate attention
  • What can wait
  • What resources should be allocated
  • Which opportunities should be pursued

Interviewers can gain valuable insight by asking:

  • How do you decide what gets your attention first?
  • Tell me about a time competing priorities forced you to make difficult choices.
  • How do you determine what is urgent versus important?

The answers often reveal how candidates balance competing demands, manage pressure, and allocate resources.

Looking Beyond the Resume

Resumes tell us where someone has been. Interviews should help us understand how they think.

When organizations focus exclusively on experience, they risk overlooking one of the most important predictors of future success: decision-making. The ability to assess information, evaluate risk, prioritize effectively, and exercise sound judgment influences performance in virtually every role.

Experience may open the door to opportunity. Decision-making often determines what happens once someone walks through it. The next time you interview a candidate, spend less time exploring what they accomplished and more time understanding how they made the decisions that led to those accomplishments.

Because how people think is often more predictive than what they have done.

Lighthouse Consulting Partners, LLC

Testing Division provides a variety of services, including an In-depth Work Style Personality assessment for new hires, staff development, career guidance and team building. Our assessment  is available in 19 different languages. In addition, we offer skills testing and 360 assessments.

Business Consulting for Higher Productivity Division provides leadership and management coaching, a variety of workshops including team building, communication styles, stress management, leadership training, staff planning, operations, and much more.

For more information on our services, please go to www.LighthouseConsulting.com or contact us at Info@LighthouseConsulting.com.

Permission is needed from Lighthouse Consulting Partners, LLC to reproduce any portion provided in this article. © 2026

When Interviewing Listen for Patterns, Not Stories

By Patty Crabtree, CEO Lighthouse Consulting Partners LLC

 

Interviews are full of stories.

Candidates describe projects they led, challenges they overcame and successes they are proud of. Many of these stories are compelling, well-structured and easy to follow. They create a sense of confidence in the candidate and momentum in the conversation. But strong stories can be misleading. Not because they are untrue but because a single story is not a pattern.

When interviewers rely too heavily on individual examples, they risk making decisions based on moments rather than behaviors. And moments, especially in interviews, are often polished, practiced and selectively chosen.

If interviews are meant to predict how someone will perform over time then the goal is not to collect great stories. The goal is to recognize patterns.

Why Stories Are So Persuasive

Stories work because they are easy to process. They have a beginning, middle and end. They highlight action and resolution. They often showcase the candidate in a positive light. And when delivered confidently, they create a strong emotional impression.

Interviewers naturally respond to this process. A strong story can make a candidate seem capable, collaborative or decisive even if the story represents a one-time situation rather than a consistent way of operating. The challenge is that interviews tend to reward storytelling ability.

Candidates who are articulate, reflective and prepared often stand out not necessarily because they operate more effectively but because they communicate their experiences more convincingly. This is where interviewers must shift their focus.

The Difference Between a Story and a Pattern

A story answers the question: What happened? A pattern answers the question: How does this person consistently operate? What do they do? For example, a candidate might share a story about successfully resolving a conflict. That is helpful but it does not tell you whether that approach is typical.

To identify a pattern, you need to understand:

  • Does this behavior show up across multiple situations?
  • Does their decision-making process remain consistent?
  • How do they respond when conditions are less favorable?
  • Do their examples reinforce each other or contradict each other?

Patterns are built through repetition and consistency. They are less about the outcome of a single event and more about the approach behind the outcome.

Why Interviewers Miss Patterns

Most interviewers are not trained to listen for patterns. Instead, they are trained or conditioned to ask a series of questions, gather examples and move through the interview efficiently.

There are a few reasons patterns get missed:

  1. Moving too quickly – When interviews prioritize covering many topics, there is little time to explore any one example in depth.
  2. Being satisfied with a strong answer – A well-delivered story creates a sense of closure. It feels like enough.
  3. Focusing on outcomes over process – Interviewers often listen for success rather than how that success was achieved.
  4. Not connecting examples together – Each answer is treated as a separate data point rather than part of a larger pattern.

As a result, interviews become a collection of stories rather than an understanding of behavior.

Teaching Yourself to Listen Differently

Listening for patterns is a skill and like any skill, it can be developed with intention. It begins with a simple shift: listen for how, not just what. Instead of focusing on the outcome of a story, pay attention to the approach behind it.

When a candidate describes a situation, listen for:

  • How they made decisions?
  • How they involved others?
  • How they handled uncertainty or pressure?
  • How they responded to feedback?
  • How they adjusted when things did not go as planned?

Then as the interview continues, listen for whether those same approaches appear again.

Using Follow-Up Questions to Build Patterns

Patterns do not reveal themselves in a single answer. They emerge over time often through thoughtful follow-up questions.

When a candidate shares an example, stay with it long enough to understand the details:

  • What options did you consider?
  • What made that situation challenging for you?
  • How did others respond to your approach?
  • What did you learn from that experience?

Then, in a later question, listen for similar signals:

  • Does their decision-making process sound familiar?
  • Do they approach challenges in the same way?
  • Are they consistent in how they describe working with others?

You begin to hear a pattern forming. Or, in some cases, you begin to notice inconsistencies. Both are valuable.

When Stories and Patterns Don’t Match

One of the most useful moments in an interview is when a strong story does not align with the broader pattern.

For example, a candidate may describe a highly collaborative situation in one answer but in another example, their approach may sound more independent or directive.

This does not automatically mean something is wrong. But it does signal an opportunity to explore further:

  • Which approach is more typical?
  • What factors influenced the different approaches?
  • How do they adapt their style across situations?

These moments help you understand flexibility, self-awareness and consistency all critical to predicting performance.

Listening for What Repeats

A helpful way to think about pattern recognition is this: What keeps showing up?

Across different questions and examples, certain themes tend to repeat:

  • A consistent way of making decisions
  • A predictable approach to handling conflict
  • A common response to stress or pressure
  • A pattern in how they engage with others

These repeated signals are far more predictive than any single example. They give you a clearer sense of what it will be like to work with this person not just what they are capable of describing.

The Interviewer’s Role

Shifting from story-based interviewing to pattern-based listening changes the role of the interviewer. Instead of simply guiding the conversation, the interviewer becomes an active observer of behavior.

This means:

  • Staying present in the conversation
  • Connecting responses across different questions
  • Being curious about inconsistencies
  • Resisting the urge to move on too quickly

It also means accepting that great interviews are not always the smoothest ones. Sometimes the most valuable interviews include pauses, follow-up questions and moments where the candidate has to think more deeply about their response. That is where real insight often lives.

Final Thoughts

Stories are useful. They provide context, examples and insight into past experiences. But stories alone are not enough.

If the goal of an interview is to predict future performance, then the focus must shift from individual moments to consistent patterns. When interviewers learn to listen for patterns not just stories, they begin to see beyond polished narratives and into how someone actually thinks, behaves and operates over time. And that is what leads to better hiring decisions.

Lighthouse Consulting Partners, LLC

Testing Division provides a variety of services, including an In-depth Work Style Personality assessment for new hires, staff development, career guidance and team building. Our assessment is available in 19 different languages. In addition, we offer skills testing and 360 assessments.

Business Consulting for Higher Productivity Division provides leadership and management coaching, a variety of workshops including team building, communication styles and stress management, leadership training, staff planning, operations and much more.

For more information on our services, please go to www.LighthouseConsulting.com or contact us at Info@LighthouseConsulting.com.

Permission is needed from Lighthouse Consulting Partners, LLC to reproduce any portion provided in this article. © 2026

Interviewing Beyond the Surface

By Patty Crabtree, CEO of Lighthouse Consulting Partners LLC

Interviews often move quickly. A question is asked. The candidate gives a thoughtful answer. The interviewer nods, feels satisfied, and moves on to the next topic. The conversation continues this way until time runs out and everyone leaves feeling like they learned a lot.

But in reality, many interviews only scratch the surface. The first answer a candidate gives is often the most prepared version of the story. It is polished, organized, and designed to highlight success. That does not mean it is inaccurate but it rarely tells the whole story.

In interviewing, the next question often begins to open the door to the truth. The follow-up question moves candidates beyond their prepared responses and into real-time thinking. That is when you begin to hear how someone actually approaches challenges, makes decisions, and interacts with others. And sometimes it takes more than one follow-up question to fully understand what really happened.

 

The Surface Answer

Most candidates arrive at interviews with several examples ready to share. They have likely practiced describing situations where they solved problems, collaborated with a team or delivered strong results. These stories are often well structured. They follow a familiar pattern: the situation, the action taken and the positive outcome.

For example, if you ask: “Tell me about a time you resolved a conflict on your team.”

A candidate might respond with a clear and polished story about bringing people together, communicating openly and reaching a successful resolution. At this stage, the answer sounds strong. The candidate demonstrates collaboration, communication and leadership.

And this is where many interviews move on. But if the interviewer stops there, they only hear the version of the story that has been prepared and practiced.

Opening the Door with Follow-Up Questions

The follow-up question is where the conversation starts to shift. Instead of moving on, the interviewer stays with the same example and explores it more deeply.

For instance:

  • What specific actions did you take that brought the team together?
  • How did the other person initially respond to your approach?
  • What part of that situation was most challenging for you?
  • What feedback did you receive afterward?

These questions invite candidates to move beyond the summary and begin explaining the experience in greater detail. Often the tone of the conversation changes at this point. Candidates pause longer. They think before answering. They provide additional context or nuance that was not part of the original story.

This is where insight begins to emerge. And sometimes the next question is only the beginning. It may take several follow-up questions before the full picture becomes clear.

Why Interviewers Stop Too Early

If follow-up questions are so valuable, why do interviewers often move on?

There are a few common reasons.

  • First, interviews are time limited. Interviewers want to cover many topics within a short conversation so they prioritize breadth over depth. Sometimes diving into a few strong questions will provide more insight than asking questions on multiple topics.
  • Second, strong answers feel reassuring. When a candidate provides a compelling example, interviewers feel confident they have learned what they needed to know. In essence, they may hear what they want to hear instead of exploring more deeply.
  • Third, moving on feels polite. Some interviewers worry that probing too deeply may feel uncomfortable or confrontational. Interviews are meant to be insightful. While asking deeper questions may be uncomfortable, it can provide the information needed to make an informed decision.

But depth not coverage is what reveals patterns. Hearing ten surface-level stories tells you far less than deeply understanding two or three.

 

What Follow-Up Questions Reveal

When interviewers stay with an example longer, several important signals emerge.

  • Decision-making patterns. How did the candidate decide what to do? What options did they consider? Did they seek input from others?
  • Personal challenges. What part of the situation stretched them or made them uncomfortable?
  • Impact on others. How did colleagues experience the situation? Did the candidate adapt their approach based on feedback?
  • Learning and adjustment. What did the candidate take away from the experience? Did it change how they work today?

These insights rarely appear in the first answer. They emerge gradually as the interviewer asks additional questions and the candidate reflects more deeply on what actually happened.

Slowing the Interview Down

One of the most effective interview techniques is simply slowing the conversation down. Instead of asking the next question immediately, pause and listen for something worth exploring.

A word.
A phrase.
A decision.
A moment in the story that raises curiosity.

Then ask another question. And another after that.

For example:

       “You mentioned that the team initially resisted your approach. What did that resistance look like?”

or

      “You said the project ultimately succeeded. What part of that process was most difficult for you personally?”

Each additional question brings the conversation a little closer to how the candidate truly operates.

 

Listening for Patterns, Not Stories

Stories are helpful, but they are not the goal. The real goal of an interview is to understand patterns.

  • How someone consistently approaches problems.
  • How they communicate under pressure.
  • How they respond to feedback or disagreement.

Patterns only become visible when the interviewer looks beyond the first answer. When candidates describe multiple examples in detail, similarities begin to appear. Their thinking process becomes clearer. Their approach to challenges becomes more predictable.

Without follow-up questions, those patterns remain hidden behind polished summaries.

 

The Interviewer’s Role

A helpful way to think about interviewing is this:

Your role is not simply to ask questions. Your role is to investigate with curiosity.

When something sounds interesting, unclear, or important, stay with it. Ask another question. Invite the candidate to explain their thinking more fully. Most candidates actually welcome this deeper conversation. It gives them the opportunity to move beyond rehearsed answers and share how they truly work. 

 

The Next Question

The first question opens the conversation. The next question often opens the door to the truth. And sometimes it takes a few more questions before the full picture comes into view.

Great interviews are not defined by how many questions are asked. They are defined by how thoughtfully the interviewer explores the answers.

Because in hiring conversations, the truth rarely lives in the first answer. It emerges through curiosity and thoughtful follow-up.

If you are interested in learning more about how to incorporate follow up questions into your interview process, please contact us at Info@LighthouseConsulting.com.

 

Lighthouse Consulting Partners, LLC

Testing Division provides a variety of services, including an In-depth Work Style Personality assessment for new hires, staff development, career guidance and team building. Our assessment  is available in 19 different languages. In addition, we offer skills testing and 360 assessments.

Business Consulting for Higher Productivity Division provides leadership and management coaching, a variety of workshops including team building, communication styles, stress management, leadership training, staff planning, operations, and much more.

For more information on our services, please go to www.LighthouseConsulting.com or contact us at Info@LighthouseConsulting.com.

Permission is needed from Lighthouse Consulting Partners, LLC to reproduce any portion provided in this article. © 2026

Why Investing in Your People is the Best Business Strategy You’ll Ever Make

By Patty Crabtree, CEO Lighthouse Consulting Partners LLC 

After 50 years in business, a seasoned executive shared a simple truth: “The most valuable asset in any company isn’t a product or process—it’s your people. When your team is firing on all cylinders, the entire organization thrives.”

This insight is more than just a reflection—it’s a proven business strategy.

While companies often chase innovation, efficiency, and scalability, long-term success comes from within. Organizations that invest in their people—through skill development, coaching, and improved team dynamics—gain a competitive advantage that’s hard to replicate.

 

The ROI of Investing in Human Capital

The numbers speak for themselves:

  • A study by LinkedIn Learningfound that 94% of employees said they would stay longer at a company that invested in their learning and development.
  • According to Gallup, companies with highly engaged workforces outperform their peers by 21% in profitabilityand 17% in productivity.
  • Research from Boston Consulting Groupfound that companies with above-average talent management practices saw 2 times the revenue growth and 1.5 times the profit margins compared to those with below-average practices.

Staff development isn’t just a nice-to-have. It’s a multiplier. When employees feel seen, valued, and equipped to succeed, they show up with more energy, creativity, and ownership.

 

Team Dynamics: The Hidden Lever of High Performance

Often overlooked, team dynamics are the engine behind organizational success. When teams function well—communicating clearly, understanding one another’s strengths, and collaborating effectively—they move faster and solve problems more creatively.

People often think of growth as an individual pursuit but the real transformation happens when you invest in how people work together. That’s where performance leaps forward.

The Harvard Business Review reports that psychologically safe teams—where individuals feel they can take risks and express themselves without fear—are more innovative and faster at solving complex problems. And according to Deloitte, companies that prioritize inclusive team cultures are 8 times more likely to achieve better business outcomes.

 

The Cost of Doing Nothing

On the flip side, failing to invest in people is costly:

  • S. businesses lose up to $1 trillion annuallydue to voluntary turnover, much of it driven by lack of growth opportunities (Gallup).
  • Disengaged employees cost organizations 18% of their annual salaryin lost productivity.
  • Poor collaboration and communication in teams account for 86% of workplace failures, according to Salesforce research.

When organizations neglect professional growth or allow team dysfunction to go unaddressed, the result is high turnover, low morale, and underperformance—all of which erode business value over time.

 

Building for the Long Game

The organizations that rise above these challenges are those that commit to long-term investment in their people. They don’t just train—they coach, mentor, and create structures for team learning. They go beyond job descriptions to understand how individuals think, problem-solve, and contribute to group dynamics.

Understanding work style differences, communication preferences, and stress patterns isn’t just a team-building exercise—it’s strategic alignment. When people understand each other, trust builds. With trust, you get speed, resilience, and results.

 

Final Thought: It’s Not Just Strategy—It’s Culture

The strongest companies don’t view people development as a one-off workshop or a checkbox on the HR agenda. They embed it into their culture.

They ask:

  • Are we helping our people grow?
  • Do our teams work in alignment or in silos?
  • Are we building a culture of trust, accountability, and continuous improvement?

When the answer is yes, the dividends are real—and measurable.

The return on investing in people is exponential. When you build a culture where individuals grow and teams thrive, you don’t just weather change—you lead through it.

Lighthouse Consulting Partners, LLC

Testing Division provides a variety of talent management services, including in-depth work style personality assessments for new hires, staff development and team building. Lighthouse provides these assessments  in 19 different languages along with offering skills testing, leadership and management coaching and offer a variety of workshops including team building and interview skills.

Business Consulting for Higher Productivity Division provides professional coaching, stress management workshops, sales and customer service training, negotiation skills, leadership training, staff planning, operations, and much more.

For more information on our services, please go to www.lighthouseconsulting.com or contact us at Info@LighthouseConsulting.com.

Permission is needed from Lighthouse Consulting Partners, LLC to reproduce any portion provided in this article © 2025

Hire Right the First Time

Hire Right The First Time By Dana Borowka, MA Is your company still hiring employees using the same process it did five years ago? Think carefully about the question for a moment. Is the company recruiting, screening, interviewing, and verifying using the same techniques and procedures as in the past? Next question. Do you wonder […]

Read more

The Future of Sales

By Dana Borowka, MA

Not all sales and marketing people are created equal. In a challenging economy, you want to hire people who are creative, image001innovative and can get results despite the roadblocks. After all, today is a new day with new opportunities for those that are open to them. To improve hiring decisions, many companies have found out how to crack the personality code by using robust in-depth work style personality testing. Work style assessments are a standard recruiting practice for many branches of the government and military, as well as many Fortune 500 companies when assessing potential hires for key or critical positions.

Our research for our book, Cracking the Personality Code, reveals that this is not guesswork or an untested science. Here are eight proven ways to use in-depth work style personality testing to hire the right sales and marketing people who are willing to fight for market share.

1. Compare Their Resume Against Your Job Description

Sounds obvious, doesn’t it? Surprising how easy it is to blow right past this step in the hiring process. Past experience alone is not what you are looking for when you review the resume. You are looking at how well they performed, what were their successes, and how adaptable they might be to the job that needs to be done for your organization. Experience is nice, but it is results that really count.

2. Assess Their Problem-Solving Resources

Is this person a problem solver? If so, what kind of problem solver? Each of us has unique problem-solving resources on which we rely. You will want to determine what the person’s strengths are when it comes to problem solving. What are the usual approaches this person will use to resolve these problems?

3. Determine Their Patterns For Coping With Stress

Stress is a force that tends to distort the body, a factor that induces bodily or mental tension, or an automatic physical reaction to a danger or demand in the environment. As one physician stated, “Stress is any demand, either internal, external or both, that causes us to mentally and physically readjust in order to maintain a sense of balance within our life.”

Without a doubt, stress is a fact of life in today’s work world. So determining a candidate’s or employee’s ability to cope with stress is critical for a manager.

4. Examine Their Interpersonal Interaction Styles

Breakdowns in communication are never good for an organization. So take a good look at the individual’s style for relating and communicating with others. How do they usually react in dealing with others? What is their comfort level in interacting and personal connection with others? Personality assessments can tell you the person’s major sources of gratification and satisfaction when building relationships with each other.

This is the time to identify potential red flags. A personality assessment can discover issues that are sometimes overlooked during the traditional interviewing process and can quantifybizman opening door a hunch or feeling the interviewer may have about a particular candidate. Knowing interpersonal interaction styles can also help understand how to manage individuals for greater work performance. A comparison of the interpersonal dynamics of teams, departments, employees and candidates is well worth the effort.

5. Analyze Career Activity Interests

Certain personality tests help you gain information which may either support the person’s present career choices or assist them to explore, consider and plan for another career direction. This is not to say you will be recommending another career choice to someone you are considering hiring or currently managing. Rather, you are using this information to determine fit. All organizations want to ensure that they have the right people in the right positions and effectively distribute these human assets and talents.

6. Assess How They Respond To Tests

You should also use tests with scales for what is known as “impression management.” This is necessary in order to understand the accuracy of results and whether someone is trying to “fake good” or misrepresent themselves. A critical element in predicting a potential candidate’s success is measuring real personality and style in an interview. An in-depth work style and personality assessment presents a fairly accurate picture of a candidate’s personality, work style and fit within a company’s culture.

If a profile does not have an impression management scale, then it is difficult to tell how accurate the data is. A profile needs to have at least 165 questions in order to gather enough data for this scale.  Otherwise you will have no idea of the picture you are getting from an assessment.

7. Chronicle Strengths & Weakness Ledger

Benjamin Franklin reportedly had a decision-making process when he was faced with important challenges. Franklin divided a sheet of paper into two columns, and on the left side listed the reasons for doing something and on the right side the reasons against. Much like a bank ledger with credits and debits, this simple tool greatly aided the analysis of information. Often a quick scan of the two lists gave him the information he needed to make the right choice.

We recommend you do the same for the personality of a job candidate or an employee under your supervision. Like a bank ledger, every credit should have a corresponding debit. That is because for every strength a person possesses there is a corresponding weakness. Being assertive is a strength; however, that personality can be too assertive and off putting for some people they deal with.

8. Create Personality Probing Interview Questions

So, what have you learned about the job candidate so far through personality assessments? What remains to learn? To find out, developinterview questions that probe facets of the personality you need more details on

pen on bookForget those old standby questions like, ‘Tell me about your strengths and weaknesses’. Instead, let’s say you wanted to determine how they cope with stress. You might ask the candidate to give an example of when they made a terrible mistake and how they handled it. Ask them how they think others perceive them when they are under stress. For making a mistake, did they blame others or take responsibility for the outcome? Listen for their process. Do they ask for help? Watch body language and tone of voice to see how much insecurity the candidate expresses at the idea of making a mistake or having stress..

As consultants trained in psychology, this is something we help our clients create for new candidates. To help you create questions, here are some preliminary interview questions for a candidate. Naturally, these are not meant to be questions to ask all candidates, but are indicative of the types of questions you might ask:

What process do you think helps you to learn? Give an example of how you learn a very complex system or skill and what your process was?

How would you handle a situation that brought up many different changes? How do you like to see change take place? Give an example when change was implemented and it just didn’t work out.

Have you ever worked with individuals who are abstract thinkers? How did you deal with that kind of thought process?

Give an example of when you have had to make an exception to the guidelines or rules. How have you handled that?

What was the most challenging sales situation you have ever faced and won? Give an example of when you lost a sale and what you could have done differently.

Whew, seems like a lot to worry about. As with any business decision, having and organizing the right information is critical. Work style and personality assessment testing can key in door lockprovide insight into potential hires, as well as the current workforce. The trick is to gather the information and then look at it in an organized fashion.

 

If you would like additional information on this topic or others, please contact your Human Resources department or Lighthouse Consulting Services LLC, Santa Monica, CA 90403, (310) 453-6556, dana@lighthouseconsulting.com & our website: www.lighthouseconsulting.com

Dana Borowka, MA, CEO of Lighthouse Consulting Services, LLC and his organization constantly remain focused on their mission statement – “To bring effective insight to your business”. They do this through the use of in-depth work style & personality assessments to raise the hiring bar so companies select the right people to reduce hiring and management errors. LCS can test in 19 different languages, provide domestic and international interpersonal coaching and offer a variety of workshops – team building, interpersonal communication, stress & time management, sales & customer service training and negotiation skills as well as our full-service Business Consulting Division. Dana has over 30 years of business consulting experience and is a nationally renowned speaker, radio and TV personality on many topics. He is the co-author of the books, “Cracking the Personality Code”, “Cracking the Business Code” and “Cracking the High-Performance Team Code”. To order the books, please visit www.lighthouseconsulting.com.

Lighthouse Consulting Services, LLC Divisions

Testing Division provides a variety of services, including in-depth work style & personality assessments for new hires & staff development. LCS can test in 19 different languages, skills testing, domestic and international interpersonal coaching and offer a variety of workshops – team building, interpersonal communication.

Business Consulting for Higher Productivity Division provides stress & time management workshops, sales & customer service training and negotiation skills, leadership training, market research, staff planning, operations, ERP/MRP selection and implementation, refining a remote work force, M&A including due diligence – success planning – value creation and much more.

Permission is needed from Lighthouse Consulting Services to reproduce any portion provided in this article. © 2024

Don’t Rush the Hiring Process: Bad Hires Are 3X More Costly Than You Think

By Dana Borowka, MA

There is an old adage that one bad apple can spoil the whole bunch. A bad hire can be that bad apple for you.

by Natalie Grainger

Now contrast that to the famous words of anthropologist Margaret Mead: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed, citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.”

This is the power of good hires. Team members working together in thoughtful, committed ways to the company mission, core values and objectives can change your workplace world for the better.

When our team has conversations with C-level executives, better hiring is on their minds. Research backs this up.

“Labor shortages are driving talent retention and recruitment to the top of the CEO agenda in 2022,” concluded The Conference Board in its 2022 “C-Suite Outlook,” it’s 23rd annual survey. The report reflects the views of 1,614 C-suite executives, including 917 CEOs globally.

The Conference Board report details the external stress points business leaders face and the impact of these stressors on growth strategies. It includes views on the benefits and risks of hybrid work models, and the struggles to find and keep good employees.

Finding good employees is noticeably harder these days. Research from Glassdoor says attracting the right job candidates is the most difficult task for 76% of hiring managers. A common woe is that the best hires are snapped up in the first ten days of actively being available on the market. This adds up to a hiring process that lasts 36 days, on average.

True Cost Of Bad Hires

Bad hires can cost your company more than you think. CareerBuilder reports that 74% of employers say they have hired the wrong person for the job.

by FIN

According to the U.S. Department of Labor, the average cost of a bad hire is up to 30% of the employee’s first-year earnings.

When you examine the true costs broken down by hiring, retention, and pay, you might conclude the researchers at the Labor Department might be lowballing the true cost. Our team extrapolates the real cost might equal at least projected first-year earnings and maybe more.

Here’s why: Poor hires can result in lost productivity and expenses in hiring, recruiting, and training replacements. That can quickly add up.

Robert Half International reports in Fortune Insiders that managers assert lost salary isn’t the only money they lose by hiring the wrong person. Managers must also spend 17% of their time monitoring underperforming employees. In a typical workweek, that time suck equates to nearly a full day of wasted time.

A Harvard Business Review column by David K. Williams and Mary Michele Scott noted “that of nearly 2,700 employers surveyed, 41% estimate a single bad hire cost $25,000. A quarter of respondents estimate a bad choice has cost $50,000 or more.”

Not to mention the demoralizing impact on other employees.

”A hire that is going the wrong direction is bad for everybody involved,” writes Williams and Scott. “A dismissal is bad for the morale of the entire team. It’s even worse for the morale and future of the person you fire, who faces one of the most stressful events in human experience.”

by Tim Mossholder

Here are just some of the ways your company can suffer: lost productivity, loss of focus, poor execution, training costs, legal fees, damaged employee morale, damaged reputation in the marketplace, and lost manager supervision time.

Research by Gallup estimates that actively disengaged employees in the United States cost businesses anywhere from $450 billion to $550 billion in lost productivity each year.

Plus, the number of bad hires is staggering. Think of how many new hires fail to meet expectations.

“Over 50% of newly hired employees fail to meet expectations,” says recruiting expert Barry Deutsch of Impact Hiring Solutions. “Most hiring managers don’t make a significant change by firing the person, putting a PIP together, or having a deep developmental program to improve performance or behavior. They just accept partially competent people, or take those elements off the plate that the employee can’t do – and the manager does it by allowing the monkey to be transferred onto their back.”

Deutsch says that is the definition of dysfunctional.

How To Avoid Bad Hires

Deutsch, coauthor of the book You’re Not The Person I Hired, offers several suggestions for avoiding bad hires.

“One of the most powerful interview techniques for measuring success is to probe for the ability to continuously learn and adapt it to their job and expectations,” says Deutsch. “Do you probe for deep and continuous learning from the professionals and managers you’re looking to hire?”

According to Deutsch, the interview, when conducted with focused structured questions that correlate to job expectations, can be a very reliable predictor of future success.

“Unfortunately, most hiring managers don’t define the expectations so the interview questions are in doubt,” adds Deutsch “Secondly, the biggest mistake is that most hiring managers have never been trained how to conduct an accurate interview – so they are just winging it based on their life experiences. No wonder, the studies show that interview accuracy is basically as effective as rolling dice.”

Deutsch believes a proper interview process includes in-depth work style and personality assessments. As with any business decision, having the right information is critical. Work style and personality assessment testing can help reduce bad hires in three main ways:

by Bernd Dittrich

Identify potential red flags. An In-depth Workstyle and Personality assessment can discover issues that are sometimes overlooked during the interviewing process and can quantify an intuition or feeling the interviewer may have about a particular candidate. It can be used to identify potential red flags concerning behavioral issues, help understand how to manage individuals for greater work performance and compare interpersonal dynamics of teams, departments, and candidates.

Optimize employees’ work performance. An In-depth Workstyle and Personality can provide extensive information on an individual’s ability to work with their job responsibilities, team dynamics and company culture. Additionally, the assessment can show effective strategies to gain optimal performance from that individual within their particular work environment. It can also be employed to quickly identify the most effective management style for a new employee or predict how team members are likely to interact.

Ensure you have the right people in the right positions: Additionally, an In-depth Workstyle and Personality Assessments can be utilized in rehires, or situations which call for employees to re-apply for their current jobs, as in the case of a corporate merger or restructuring. A personality assessment can also ensure that your company continues to have the right people in the right positions and distribute assets and talents effectively.

How does Deutsch define a good hire?

by Jackalope West

“I would define quality of hire as a candidate who hits or exceeds your specific quantifiable outcomes at the 90-day or six-month timeframe with a set of behaviors and style that is consistent with your organizational culture and values,” says Deutsch.

Assessments and professional feedback is not just for the Fortune 500 companies, but can help organizations of all sizes with avoiding bad hires.

Lighthouse Consulting Services helps a variety of companies avoid bad hires through in-depth workstyle and personality assessments and professional interpretation of the results. Not only does this help avoid bad hires, but these assessments also help companies get the most out of new hires from day one. These assessments are tremendous productivity tools for managers who want high-performing teams.

In addition, Lighthouse Consulting provides 360-degree feedback surveys. Be warned: The amount and level of training of those providing the 360-degree feedback can impact the level of accuracy of the feedback.

Without guidance from a trained professional, bias may distort the value of the feedback. To get the full benefit, leaders need to be debriefed on the 360-degree survey results by trained professionals such as those who are part of the Lighthouse Consulting team.

Bottom line: When professionally conducted and interpreted, the results assessments help produce can be significant. But without a trained professional to help interpret the assessments, the value of their results is severely diminished.

by Kyler Boone

Dana Borowka, MA, CEO of Lighthouse Consulting Services, LLC and his organization constantly remain focused on their mission statement – “To bring effective insight to your business”. They do this through the use of in-depth work style & personality assessments to raise the hiring bar so companies select the right people to reduce hiring and management errors. LCS can test in 19 different languages, provide domestic and international interpersonal coaching and offer a variety of workshops – team building, interpersonal communication, stress & time management, sales & customer service training and negotiation skills as well as our full-service Business Consulting Division. Dana has over 30 years of business consulting experience and is a nationally renowned speaker, radio and TV personality on many topics. He is the co-author of the books, “Cracking the Personality Code”, “Cracking the Business Code” and “Cracking the High-Performance Team Code”. To order the books, please visit www.lighthouseconsulting.com.

Lighthouse Consulting Services, LLC – Testing Division provides a variety of services, including in-depth work style & personality assessments for new hires & staff development. LCS can test in 19 different languages, skills testing, domestic and international interpersonal coaching and offer a variety of workshops – team building, interpersonal communication. Business Consulting for Higher Productivity Division provides stress & time management workshops, sales & customer service training and negotiation skills, leadership training, market research, staff planning, operations, ERP/MRP selection and implementation, refining a remote work force, M&A including due diligence – success planning – value creation and much more.

If you would like additional information on this topic or others, please contact Lighthouse Consulting Services LLC, Santa Monica, CA, (310) 453-6556, dana@lighthouseconsulting.com & our website: www.lighthouseconsulting.com.

Permission is needed from Lighthouse Consulting Services, LLC to reproduce any portion provided in this article. © 2024