Recruitment: Selecting the best possible finance staff

If an organisation is seeking to achieve excellence it can, in my view, only be attained through recruiting excellent staff. The appointment of senior finance staff is one of the most important decisions that an organisation will make. In the public sector there is an added pressure to make the best use of public money through recruitment practices ensuring that we apply equality of opportunity.  This is not necessarily straight forward and organisations need to consider carefully how they achieve the best possible outcome in all recruitments.

In my article Negotiating the final hurdle to senior finance posts (Room 151, 9 April), I considered how candidates might approach senior level selection interviews.  This piece looks at the other side of the coin and considers how recruiters should approach convening and managing appointment panels.

Key to this is what I call the recruitment question.  Traditionally, in the public sector the question is formed along the lines of: “How do we select a candidate that meets the specification for the role?”

Whereas, I prefer this question:

“How do we secure a strong shortlist of candidates that meet the specification for the role and how do we ensure that we make the best possible decision on the appointment from that shortlist?”

There is a wide variation of emphasis in the two approaches which drives how panels might approach the appointment process.  To achieve a positive answer to the second of these questions organisations need to plan their processes carefully and, in particular, they need to ensure that they are geared to get the best from candidates in the final panel interview.

Now managers reading this may find the advice here a little simplistic but I believe that the basics are important, So here we go with my top five tips:

• Consider panel membership:  I have found that the ideal number of members is three. Other numbers can work, but three members makes it easy to manage the interview, ensure that there is a reasonable spread of opinion and remove any risk of bias in the process.  All members should have an understanding of the objectives of the role being filled and be able to put aside reasonable preparation time prior to the interview.
• Prepare questions: Obvious, but often done chaotically.  A 45 minute interview requires nine questions (three from each panel member) plus an opportunity for the candidate to ask a question, or bring in other information not covered in discussion.  Think carefully about the questions in advance and ensure that all panel members agree with the approach.  Be flexible.  But if you have a good script stick to it in the interview. If you make it up as you go along it will show and detract from the strength of the process.
• Have a scoring mechanism: This is where we get a little technical. Interview panels need a proper sensitive scoring mechanism that will compare candidates on a level playing field basis.  The traditional categorisations of fitted, partially fitted and not fitted are not, in my book, sophisticated enough . What I have found works, is 10 marks per question independently marked by each of the three panel members, which (including 10 marks for additional questions or points from the candidates) gives a score out of 100 for each panel member resulting in a score out of 300. Experience has taught me that this, supported by test scores, achieves a transparent differentiation between candidates which can be used as a basis for decision making.
• Manage the interview:  May see obvious but is important. You are interviewing candidates because they have a chance of being appointed as potential employees.  You therefore want to ensure that they have the best chance of demonstrating they would perform well in the job. Trick questions designed to unsettle candidates reflect badly on the employer – challenging questions that give candidates the opportunity to demonstrate the depth of their understanding of the role will impress and add to the quality of the final decision.  Keep to time and give a clear introduction to the interview. Explaining your expectations helps candidates to do the best that they can.
• Be sure to come to an evidence based decision: Ultimately, the panels’ decision should be specification driven and based on objective measures of performance throughout the selection process.  Score the relative performances as you go along then sense check the results at the end.  I have found that every time I have used this scoring approach it has always resulted in a strong appointment and that the panels involved universally found that scoring accurately reflected the relative strengths and weaknesses of candidates.

Many out their will be using this type of approach. You are to be applauded because you are probably making sound recruitment decisions that both achieve best value and promote equality of opportunity.  Others may feel that this is too process driven for their personal taste.  I can understand that but can only say that in a career of making appointments I have always found this approach produces a clear result which has always led to a good appointment.  I rest my case.

Stephen Fitzgerald is a management and financial consultant working in the local authority sector.