In recent years, Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives have come under intense scrutiny. Despite lofty hopes and promises, many programs have failed to deliver tangible results, leading numerous companies to abandon their efforts. Notably, companies like Google, Meta, Zoom and Amazon have scaled back their DEI programs in recent months.
However, the issue lies not in the concept of DEI itself, but the fact that it’s not possible to achieve using current hiring methods. As a result people get hired for the wrong reasons. I learned long ago when I started out in engineering, that you can’t push on rope.
Having a diverse workforce of top performers makes sense. Getting hired to meet diversity goals, doesn’t.
By focusing on performance rather than arbitrary qualifications, the door is opened to a more diverse pool of high-potential candidates who may have a different mix of skills and experiences but excel at doing the actual work required.
The Current State of DEI
The root of the problem traces back to outdated and poorly designed hiring practices.
Traditional hiring techniques rely heavily on skills and experience-laden job descriptions, conventional behavioral interviewing, and generic competency models that fail to predict actual job performance. Moreover, hiring managers, often lacking proper training and accountability for their hiring decisions, are left to make critical choices without the necessary tools or metrics.
This flawed system creates an environment where bias and emotional decisions reign supreme. When DEI initiatives falter, finger-pointing ensues, further exacerbating the issue. It’s no wonder that DEI programs are increasingly viewed as failures, with companies rushing to distance themselves from these efforts despite their potential value when implemented correctly.
A Vastly Difference Approach
Since 1978, my colleagues and I, with no background in HR whatsoever, realized that traditional job descriptions, competency models, behavioral interviewing, personality assessments, and conventional recruiting techniques were not just counterproductive, they were misguided.
Over the years the process was fully documented and ultimately called Performance-based Hiring.
But whatever you call the process, it worked then, and it still works, but most HR leaders still stick with their traditional methods despite its obvious failures.
On the other hand, those non-traditional HR leaders and managers who have used the process have accurately predicted on-the-job performance, avoided hiring mistakes, reduced interviewer bias, increased diversity hiring outcomes without compromising quality, and attracted top-tier candidates who consistently outperform those hired through traditional methods.
Instead of focusing on a laundry list of skills and experiences, work is defined as a series of 6-8 key performance objectives. The process starts by asking hiring managers, “What does the person need to do to be successful in this role over the course of the first year?”
This simple shift has profound implications. By focusing on performance rather than arbitrary qualifications, the door is opened to a more diverse pool of high-potential candidates who may have a different mix of skills and experiences but excel at doing the actual work required.
The Legal and Practical Foundations
Given the non-traditional nature of this approach, it was crucial to secure academic and legal validation. David Goldstein, a renowned labor attorney, reviewed the Performance-based Hiring system described in my book, “Hire with Your Head,” and concluded:
By creating compelling job descriptions that are focused on key performance objectives, by using advanced marketing and networking concepts to find top people, by adopting evidence-based interviewing techniques, and by integrating recruiting into the interviewing process, companies can attract better candidates and make better hiring decisions.
Nevertheless, because the Performance-based Hiring system does differ from traditional recruiting and hiring processes, questions arise as to whether employers can adopt Performance-based Hiring and still comply with the complex array of statutes, regulations, and common law principals that regulate the workplace. The answer is yes.
A Simple Plan for Implementing Performance-based Hiring
Redefine Job Descriptions: Focus on key performance objectives rather than a list of qualifications. This attracts candidates who are capable of doing the job, regardless of their background.
Adopt Evidence-based Interviewing: Move beyond traditional behavioral interviews to assess candidates based on their ability to perform the actual job requirements.
Train Hiring Managers: Equip decision-makers with the tools and knowledge to evaluate candidates effectively and without bias.
Measure Hiring Success: Hold hiring managers accountable for the performance and diversity of their teams.
Integrate Recruiting and Interviewing: Create a seamless process that identifies and attracts top talent while assessing their fit for the role and one that represents a true career move.
Predict Quality of Hire: Using a structured scorecard that focuses on performance and fit, you can avoid the political pitfalls that derail traditional DEI initiatives.
The Results Speak for Themselves
Over the past five decades, companies implementing these methods have seen remarkable results. They’ve attracted more diverse and high-potential candidates who may not have fit the traditional mold but excelled in their roles. This approach naturally fosters diversity by focusing on a candidate’s ability to perform rather than their background or pedigree.
It turns out that it’s what people do with what they have that matters. Not what they have.
That’s DEI done right. That’s Performance-based Hiring.
Learn Performance-based Hiring at Lou Adler’s new Full Immersion Program.