My wife is an executive recruiter who often works on CEO-level placements. Not only does she interview potential candidates herself but she also observes how company Boards conduct interviews of leading candidates. Through this process she has witnessed the full spectrum of questions from the mundane to the bizarre and is rarely struck by any. The other week, however, she observed a simple sequence of interview questions that positively impressed her. The interviewer was a prominent business leader (someone who's name you would recognize) evaluating a series of candidates for a COO role.
The first question posed to the individual candidates was straightforward: "have you ever fired anybody for performance reasons?" Given that the candidates were experienced leaders the answer was "yes" and each candidate briefly described the circumstances.
The second question, however, was brilliant in its elegance: "were they surprised?"
With that simple probe the interviewer positioned himself to mine deep veins of insights on each candidate's leadership and management acumen. Let's consider this.
If the candidate answers "no, they weren't surprised" then the interviewer can explore why that was. For instance, if the candidate is a strong manager of people, then the candidate might explain that the terminated employee understood what was expected of him, with clearly communicated goals and objectives. Furthermore, the candidate might continue that the terminated employee was made aware that his performance was not meeting expectations, perhaps through a formal review process that the candidate himself had instituted. The candidate might even outline how the terminated employee was coached to correct deficiencies and given opportunities for professional development and yet it still didn't work out. Although the individual answers will vary, chances are that the candidate will highlight some strong management skills and practices.
However, if the candidate answers "yes, they were surprised" then the interviewer is immediately put on notice to dig deep. Did the terminated employee have no idea that they weren't meeting expectations? Was this because their goals and objectives had not been clearly communicated? Was it because the candidate failed to have "tough" conversations to put the terminated employee on notice, perhaps because there was not formal review process? Or, most damning, does the candidate have a mercurial and volatile personality? You get the picture.
In the context of the actual interviews for the COO position, the prospective candidates offered a range of responses to the aforementioned questions. As the selection process was intense, there were also many other questions and screening procedures, including detailed reference checks. Nevertheless, when all was said and done, the candidate who ultimately prevailed had answered "no, they were not surprised."
Reader feedback is encouraged. Please feel free to post your opinions in the comments section below. Thank you for reading!
Comments