This is an argument for better hiring processes. Ones that make candidates jump at the opportunity to work with you. Acknowledging it’s possible to be empathetic and still find someone with the proper skillset. It just takes a little bit of effort, and as a leader, some ownership of the process. Hiring someone is easy. Hiring for skill and fit is harder. Hiring for skill, fit, and retention is harder still.
Your interview process is so much more than how you go about filling open positions. It’s the beginning of how you retain your talent. It’s the beginning of a relationship with a team of people you’ll spend the majority of your time with. And it’s how people who don’t work for you may learn of you.
What kind of leader do you want to be?
Most of us have had memorable interviews throughout our careers. Some are great memories of rising to the occasion, while others are painful (or funny) reminders of missed opportunities. I’ll never forget the time when, during a Skype interview, my cat strolled right across my laptop, pressed a bunch of keys, and proceeded to vomit directly onto the microphone – while the people interviewing me watched. It was horrifying – and they loved it. I thought they were being nice and that the opportunity had been blown. Looking back, I’m pretty convinced that I got a huge assist from the cat that day. For my first month on the job, I was the “hairball” guy.
It worked out for me that day, but overall, the interview process for that company was pretty standard. The communication was good, not great. The responsibilities and qualifications were accurately described. I felt like they wanted me, but they were clear that other candidates were under serious consideration. I had some information – but it was hard to know exactly where I stood. And overall, that’s a pretty typical experience for most candidates going through an interview process.
A few years later, I went through the best interview experience of my life, with Company A. I was personally contacted by a vice president of user experience who took the time to meet me for coffee, talk some shop, talk about the role he was trying to fill, and see if we were philosophically aligned. We were, so I passed the “screen”. I was then brought in to meet the team, and went through a more standard series of interviews. Afterwards, the vice president met with me for about an hour and laid all of the challenges they were facing on the table. They wanted me to know that this place wasn’t all sunshine and rainbows. It almost seemed like he was trying to talk me out of the job.
Then I got a nice surprise. They had previously let me know they wanted to take me out to dinner – but he let me know that they wanted to take me to a trendy restaurant, which happened to be walking distance from my house. They took the time to figure out what the best place for me would be. I was able to go home, change into something more comfortable, and enjoy a nice dinner getting to know the team a little bit better.
What a great experience.
Contrast that with another interview experience at Company B. I was contacted by an internal recruiter for a position at a local company with a stellar reputation. I explained that I wasn’t looking, but left the door open for future conversations. The recruiter would not be denied. I explained to her that a major step forward in my career was prerequisite to considering the opportunity – and she let me know that it was exactly that. I was brought in for a tour, and a screen with the user experience director, but he ended up taking the day off. So I met with the vice president of user experience instead – a great guy, but it was clear he was filling in. He was not going to have an active role in my hiring and he didn’t exactly know what they were looking for. I had to schedule a phone screen with the director of user experience to make up with it. It went well, so they asked me to come back to meet the team. I had become more hesitant about the company at this point, due to the previous visit and a strange dogmatic view they held on their specific design process. But I agreed and figured it would be a good experience, if nothing else.
The day before I was schedule to come in, I got an email from the recruiter asking if I had time to chat. She explained to me they were going to give me an impromptu design challenge. Given that I was under the impression that this was a managerial role, I was a bit confused, but agreed. After all, lots of design managers are active participants in their processes and fulfill the role of designer and manager. A design challenge would be no problem. The next day I came in and was put through a four-hour, solo design challenge, where I was expected to cover their entire UX process, from concept to visual design. They assured me that they knew it wasn’t realistic to finish, but they wanted to see how I worked within their framework. Fair enough.
It became clear about halfway during the day that this was not a managerial role, and that it wasn’t even a senior or lead role. I was halfway through a mid-level design interview. When the four-hour challenge was complete, the team came in and grilled me for about an hour about the work I had done. I felt tricked into coming in – they thought their culture was going to persuade me to take a role I was overqualified for and that the recruiter lied to get me into the building. It wasn’t clear if the director knew what my ambitions were. Still, I handled the challenge well and everyone reacted quite positively, despite the long challenge and tough questions. I figured they’d offer.
Plot twist: I didn’t get job from the company with the wonderful interview process. And I didn’t get the job from the company with the horrible interview process.
Not surprisingly, Company A handled the rejection quite nicely. They explained exactly why, letting me know that their stock had dropped, leadership had responded by cutting costs, and as a result they had gone into a hiring freeze. They couldn’t tell me any more due to legal reasons, but promised to reach out in the future, when the turbulent times passed, providing I was still interested. I didn’t believe their reason, or that they would reach out, but I thought they handled the rejection well. I felt disappointed.
Company B called and said while they really enjoyed having me there, and it was a tough decision, they were going to pass. I had made some questionable decisions and they weren’t 100% confident that I would be able to design at a high enough level for them. What?!?! They tricked me into coming in, during a time I wasn’t looking, got my hopes up, and then bluntly told me I didn’t have the mental capacity for a position that I didn’t even know I was interviewing for. Then they let me know that they’d reach out in a few months when more positions opened. If I was making questionable decision, then why were they going to reach back out? Why would they even want to? I didn’t believe their reason, and I thought they handled the rejection very poorly. I was confused, and felt very angry.
Company A clearly makes a great effort to make their candidates feel welcomed and comfortable. Company B clearly wants to pressure their candidates to see how they perform under pressure. Neither way is right or wrong – but it is absolutely indicative of the culture and environment of the companies.
Company A demonstrated that they really wanted a great fit. They interviewed me across a variety of different settings with various levels of stress. They were upfront in their communication and were clear in what they required in a candidate. They were looking for specific hard skills, soft skills, and fit with the team. I didn’t get the job, and I was disappointed in myself for not being better that day.
Company B claimed they had a great culture – and they may – but you’d never know it from the interview process. They were laser focused on finding a very specific candidate for a very specific role. They just communicated what they were looking for very poorly. I didn’t get the job, because in my mind I was interviewing for a managerial role, and they were looking for a designer. I was disappointed in them, whether they were intentionally being misleading or just didn’t have their hiring process in order didn’t matter. I was disappointed in myself for allowing it to get that far.
Those companies judged me over the course of those interviews, and I judged them right back. As a hiring manager, it’s crucial to remember that. You never know when the person you pass on early in the interview process because you’re trying to be thorough might end up being the best candidate. If you aren’t managing their experience, it will come back to hurt you. You might still be able to hire the candidate if they are unemployed, but chances are, they’ll bail on you the first moment they have a better opportunity.
Now let’s switch sides.
Companies have all sorts of different hiring processes. But they all boil down to one thing: getting a qualified candidate into the role. Due to the nature of user experience, it’s extremely hard to find exceptional practitioners. Some companies budget the role as a designer, but expect a candidate with a variety of skillsets. Some companies have UX leaders who don’t have a production background. They might have a background in development, or it might be a creative director. Some companies are looking for generalists, and others are looking for specialists. Some expect front-end development to be a crucial part of the skillset, other believe development requires a philosophically different way of thinking. None of it is one-size-fits-all, and outside of California and New York, none of them pay well enough for the best talent.
Leadership that manages user experience teams must understand this. If you’re a manager working for a company that has an unlimited budget, no HR processes to follow, and can offer challenging work in a great environment… you’re probably lying. The rest of us have to deal with some flaw or inefficiency in our hiring processes. It’s not easy – but finding the right candidate is something that will pay off down the road.
Managers get so focused on finding the right fit – they’re managing the schedules (and occasionally, the egos) of their existing team. They only have so much compensation and benefits they can offer. Top talent may not live nearby, and remote work might not be an option. HR might be more of a hindrance than a help. You don’t have any open time on your calendar as it is – it’s easier to spend the money on a recruiter to screen candidates for you.
And therein lies the problem.
The company, and the manager make it all about themselves.
Work is a relationship.
At worst it’s transactional, an employee selling his or her time to the company in exchange for predictable income. Contrast that with the best companies, the ones with a truly great culture, who operate like extended families. You must remember that yes, you need to fill the role, but that person is also voluntarily choosing to join your team. It’s a big responsibility for a leader. You’re filling a role that you don’t want to fill again in 6 months. I get it – we’re all busy. And it’s hard – you have to balance the perfect skillset with the perfect fit. But, if your team has high turnover – it doesn’t matter if you hire the wrong people, or if your team leaves of it’s own accord. It’s on you.
People in the user experience orbit spend a lot of time evangelizing empathy and adding value in tangential and hard to measure ways – it’s hard to make a holistic experience argument when a company can’t, or won’t, measure Lifetime Value accurately. Yet, we still conduct research, design, and iterate while considering the perspective and feelings of others. Why don’t we all do this when we’re looking to add to our own teams?
Nearly every UX team has it’s own process these days, whether it’s independent or part of a development team. Why haven’t we all systematized how we hire a perfect candidate, if we’re supposedly so process driven? And what kind of leadership does it show when you as the manager, conduct an interview process that results in hiring a bad fit, missing out on a great candidate, or worse, lacks the process itself?
Everyone claims to be looking for the highest quality candidates. But has every manager looked at his or her team, at their company, and thought about what it’s going to take to find, recruit and retain those special talents?
The story has a happy ending. Company A ended up calling back a few months later, proving their reasoning to be true. I came in for another interview with the team, and they quickly offered me a life-changing opportunity, which I happily accepted. They gave me a reason to trust them, and when they called back, they got the benefit of the doubt.
Company B also called back, about six months later. I don’t know what they wanted.
