Sometimes, There Is No Lesson To Be Learned

Sometimes, There Is No Lesson To Be Learned

We had a very unusual employee situation this week at Return Path.  A brand new senior executive we brought in to the company to be our first ever head of HR and Organization Development resigned very abruptly after only a few weeks on the job, citing a complete change of heart about her career direction and moving on to a government position in economic and community development.  Unfortunately, the person gave no notice and provided no assistance with transition, and resigned by cell phone.  What a disappointment, especially coming from an HR professional!

After getting over my disbelief/irritation/rage (not easy, not a small amount), after communicating this difficult message to the company, and after sending a thoughtful-yet-cathartic note to the person, I sat down to think a little bit about how I could have prevented or at least spotted the situation in advance. 

We interviewed the person thoroughly -- 10 people internally conducted interviews, and I interviewed the person for almost four hours myself, conducting one of the most rigorous interviews I've ever conducted given how critical this position was to our organization at this time.  (The interview followed the Chronological In-Depth Structured interview format from Brad Smart's book Topgrading -- more on that in a future posting.)  I also checked five references on the person, all of which were sterling.  I had one outside person, an executive coach with whom I work, interview the person.  Everything checked out, and the person's attitude and enthusiasm about the position couldn't have been better.

My conclusion on the lesson learned here?  It's "Sometimes, there is no lesson to be learned."  There may be ancillary lessons around handling the situation once it became apparent, but I think the core lesson I'd hope to get out of this -- that we could have done something different in the interview process or orientation or first few weeks to prevent or at least spot this ahead of time -- appears to be nonexistent.  Hmmmph!

Comments

[Pat]

Well put, and I agree. Sometimes you can only analyze but so much.

[Ian]

Over analyze is perhaps a better way of putting it. Is it possible that after such a mammoth interview process the new hire started to feel too pressured?

Did the process you followed also show the new hire your company culture? Often the simplest explanation is that the company is not at all what the new hire expected, sometimes majorly.

[Lloyd Trufelman]

Yes, we had a similar situation not too long ago. It seems that no matter how much careful vetting you do in advance, you can't tell if a candidate will work out until after they start on the job and actually fit into the company's day-to day operating culture. Ask Eisner or Ovitz!

[Steve Goldstein]

Lloyd nailed it. I've found it's hard to tell until someome starts. If someone makes it thru a tough interview process you only know how they interview. (References are usually selected by the candidate.) But my experience is that you really don't know how they'll work out until you see them at work. And they get to see everyone else...

[Tom Bartel]

I've not done much interviewing for roles at the Executive or C-level, so my experience may not be directly relevant. I think it was Andrew Currie who always advised me to have a reasonable and sound (yet basic) interview process but for a hire decision, rely on your gut instinct. Looking back, I'd have to say my "gut" is right most often. Strange how that works. Still, having been one of the peers in this particular hire decision - I voted thumbs up. I guess my gut's average just dropped! You can only control so much.

[Dio]

I'm agreeing a bit with Tom. Gut instinct has never let me down during an interview process. I've been caught up by positive feedback from peers in the past. "Wow, this person is great!" has foiled my instinct. My interviews are rarely technical. I hire with "Thirty days to make the grade or you're out" and it's rarely failed.

There are many people that're looking for something to get them to the next "perfect" job. They're clueless about job security and corporate loyalty, terms that went out decades ago. The operative wasn't "perfect", it was "next". They've reached a point in their life where they're searching for something that doesn't exist. But hell or high-water, they'll go on looking for it.

THe failed position isn't your fault. They may have been the perfect fit, they just weren't ready for the part. New parts frequently fail when put to the test, the result of a hidden flaw.

ciao,
--dio

[Sarah]

At my last company we used to team-interview and hire for Software Engineering and QA positions. We had an HR interivew, then a 2 person tag team technical quiz, QA interview, and manager interview. The candidate had to "pass" one area to get to the next area (saving time).
The QA interview quickly became more of a "culture" interview and gutt-feeling feedback which turned out to be just as valuable as the techie interview for this type of hire.
Even so, some of the new engineers could dive right in, learn the system, and do the job; others just didn't seem to "get" the processes of the team causing their work to need re-doing by someone else later.
We finally resorted to only hiring 30 days contract-to-hire for this particular role, so everyone, including the candidate, got to "try before they buy".
This seemed to work out well, but we never did end up putting our finger on the reason(s) why some candidates excelled in the position/environment, and some did not, when each had interviewed well.