I don't think I need to be from HR to say this but...
1. It sure does help an employee to tell them small adjustments to make throughout their day, week, task, project, or goal (i.e. continuous feedback) as opposed to them finishing a project, quarter, or entire year and tell them they didn't meet expectations. It's just common sense and common courtesy. No one likes a surprise PIP. If employees got more constant and constructive feedback, they would know they are underperforming and more likely transition themselves out and save the employer the hassle.
2. I'm not sure about compliance, but I can speak about fairness. Talent acquisition or HR will pre-screen applicants so I can't confirm or deny applicants enter fairly. But my selection process starts from a salary range review to ensure its in budget. Because my organization is very fiscally minded, the recruiter always lets the candidate know the range before starting the pre-screen. Fairness starts with transparency. If a candidate doesn't provide their range, it's an automatic rejection.
Then, as the recruitment process starts, I start to review their pre-screen notes with the applicant's resume to make a selection. Sometimes I find things in the pre-screen notes that aren't strong but their resume saves them, some times the pre-screen responses were better than the resume. If both are not impressive, then it's a 'no'. Fairness here is more subjective because as a hiring manager, I am stack ranking a group of candidates on a scale based on how they responded and how well they've portrayed their skills and experience in writing. So I am actually looking for good communicators here, at least on paper.
Those selected for an interview are given a case study to submit before the interview. I review each case study objectively and can typically line them up from a fantastic to poor scoring rubric. If they do not submit before the deadline, they're rejected. Fairness here is more objective because I can tell if someone knows their shit or not, as this phase is a hard/technical skills assessment. Typically I don't reject many at this stage--I have not received many poorly don't ones. I think the ones that don't know their field typically self-select out of this process.
For fairness during the interview, I make sure I tell candidates the exact same information before the interview and ask all candidates the exact same questions, in the exact same order--even if they are internal candidates! For transparency, I tell them how many questions I'll be asking so they can manage their own time. If the candidate is doing poorly, I typically skip questions and wrap up. If the candidate is taking too long to answer, I will let them know how many questions I have left. If they are still taking too long I end up skipping them and wrapping up. At the end of the interview I have yes/no/maybe piles. If I have enough 'yes's I'll skip the 'maybe's. Or I go back to my notes to select 1 or 2 'maybe's for a second round. Again, for transparency and fairness my notes, their case studies, their resumes, and their pre-screens are passed to second round interviewers, so that they can be informed. I always make sure there is at least a second round with at least 2 top candidates to ensure to limit my own biases. Then I get feedback from the second round to make an informed decision.
3. Sustained learning (continuous professional development) is built into their routine. I work in business that track time/capacity so managers allot time for PD. We also have systems that can track if they've completed X amount of hours or a course or earned a certificate.
Companies that provide an individual training budget give employees the choice to use it, so that encourages employees to take an active role in self improvement.
Additionally, as managers and leaders, we would set time aside to present lunch and learns. Even employees are encouraged to pick a topic of interest, research it, and present.
We learn best when we share our knowledge, not always through formal training programs. Learning can be achieved by pairing 2 people on the same project, or through "Peer reviews" of work. Placing an employee on a special cross-functional project or task force also encourages learning from others.
Learning can also be effective through experimentation. Managers and leaders can build in time for employees to work on "passion projects", or, purposely introduce a 3-day hackathon or a 2-hour design jam. The main thing is, management provides a problem to solve and people are given the time to explore and present solutions. Honestly, this is a fun way to learn (as it's intended that you do research) while doing work.
There a lots of methods to sustained learning. I would ask AI to provide some methods for adult learning. You'll be surprised at suggestions you've not even dreamed of!
Share your insight
Join an authentic community that helps women support each other at work. Share your professional experience or ask for advice — you can even post anonymously.
11 Comments
Join the conversation