Recruiting a new company director, Nixon McInnes stylee
Nixon McInnes is very different from most companies, and so when we decided to recruit a new director - a very big deal for us - we decided to do something a bit different as well. I thought I’d share how we’re going about this and I’d welcome your feedback. Once we’ve finished the hiring process I’ll follow up with a post about how it went and any lessons learnt.
Step 1: Working out what you need
This process started by identifying the gaps we had at board level. We divided the company into logical areas, e.g. Production; Sales; Finance; People etc, then looked at the strengths and weaknesses of the existing directors. This included personality surveys to identify the character traits that were missing if we were to have a balanced board. This process gave us a first draft job description and person spec, focussing on high level responsibilities for the role and character traits. We posted this to our company intranet and gave everyone on the team a chance to edit it and add in their own ideas. Based on this we produced a job ad and promoted it on the Wired Sussex job board and on our blogs.
Step 2: Informal initial conversations
Our job ad requested that candidates send us an email to express an interest in the job. I’m currently in the process of calling back every candidate personally to explain more about the background to the role and the recruitment process. It’s also a chance for the candidate to ask any questions to help them decide if they would like to apply. If this goes well then we ask for a CV and covering letter to be submitted.
Step 3: Assessment day
We’re going to shortlist the CVs based on our requirements in the job ad and select a number of candidates to attend an assessment day. This will be a full day with a range of activities including traditional competency-based interviews; presentations; group exercises; practical tests and a personality survey. The different activities are designed to test candidates in a very broad way - to give them all a chance to shine and show us what they are capable of. At the end of the day, we’ll tot up the scores and short-list any candidates that we feel have the ability to do the job.
Step 4: Getting the rest of the team involved
This is where the process becomes a little unusual… and interesting. Most companies would be happy to recruit at the end of the assessment day, but not us. We have a very democratic and participative culture here, and we involve the team in decisions that affect them. Step 4 gives the rest of the team a chance to assess the candidates. The first part of the exercise is a two-way panel interview. That is, a panel of NM people (anyone at all from our company who wants to take part) and all of the candidates at once. Both panels can ask any questions they like of each other. The second part of the assessment will be a ’speed dating’-style session where each team member spends a few minutes with each candidate and can talk about whatever they like. At the end of this, the NM team members vote for the two candidates they like the most, and the top two candidates form our final shortlist.
Step 5: Informal meetings
The final two candidates will then be invited back for further informal meetings: Lunch with the team; after work socialising; attending team meetings; spending time in the office hanging out and talking to people. This is a final opportunity for the candidates to get to know us and vice versa, and based on this we will make our final decision.
Tom wrote this on 16.11.07 –
It's filed in the Recruitment box
On November 16th, 2007 at 10:38 pm, Jenni responded:
Looking forward to it Tom! Sounds like a good way to really enagage with the candidates - and let them engage with us.
On November 19th, 2007 at 12:12 pm, Rob responded:
All sounds interesting and sounds like it will fit with your company culture.
I reckon you’ll end up with someone who everyone is very happy with. However does that mean they will be the best person for the job?
The X-factor style voting by the staff may put off a lot of good candidates - whilst it sounds like you don’t have too much hierarchy at NM an experienced, ambitious production director may be put off by having to be voted in by people he or she will end up needing to manage.
The potential upshot could mean you end up with someone that you end up having to manage - this would sound like the exact opposite of what you need.
I would guess you need to offload the production responsibility so that you can concentrate on what you are good at/enjoy for the benefit of developing the company and everyone who works in it.
Anyway - that’s my comments for what they’re worth.
Bear in mind you can’t please all the people all the time and you’ll die young trying!
On November 19th, 2007 at 10:13 pm, Tom responded:
Cheers for the comment, Rob. Some candidates have said that the process looks really daunting (which I can appreciate!) whilst others have said “wow, this sounds like a fantastic exercise which I’d love to experience”. On the whole, the thorough process seems to be turning on more candidates than it’s putting off. I think it demonstrates to candidates that we are taking this seriously, and after all, leadership and people management make up a big part of the job, so they should be prepared to be assessed by the people that they will be leading. I expect we will lose some candidates because of the process, but my hunch is that they’ll be the candidates who aren’t right for our culture.
On January 19th, 2008 at 11:52 am, Matthew Hill responded:
So Tom, any update on how it’s going? :-)