Amy says that future scorecards will also include a kind of “batting average” that captures the percentage of times the interviewer’s Yes or No on whether to hire the candidate matches the final decision of the hiring committee.
The Product team is also looking to roll out a phase 2 scorecard that will link quality of hire back to individual interviewers. So, over the next two review cycles, they will start matching the performance of recent hires with the particular team members who interviewed them as candidates.
An interviewer scorecard allows talent acquisition to see who does a great job — and who needs a bit of additional coaching
There is an old business axiom that what you measure is what you’ll get. And that has certainly proven true for LinkedIn’s Product team — in two important ways.
First, since they’ve started keeping track of what percentage of their interviews receive completed evaluation forms, the number has skyrocketed. In the most recent measuring period, 93% of the time interviewers completed the evaluations. Some of that increase is due to a simplified evaluation form and a new interview training course, but some of it simply comes from making it a teamwide metric.
Second, by measuring interviews and keeping track of performance, the Product team has sent a clear message that this work is highly valued and worth celebrating. Laurels currently come in the form of grateful notes from Ryan. But Amy is eager to launch a more formal recognition program, with perhaps a quarterly award to celebrate Product’s star interviewers.
“By recognizing our top interviewers,” Amy says, “more people get involved in interviewing and that speeds up the process.” Since the new hiring process rolled out and the scorecards were introduced, the number of interviewers has grown from 57 to over 100 — and the average time to “approved for hire” has been cut from 83 days to 41 and is still dropping.
The scorecard also helps the interviewers. “They actually want to know if they’re a good interviewer or not,” Amy says. “They’ve asked us to give them some metrics, so that’s also why we’ve built this scorecard.”
The metrics create transparency into the process, helping to identify interviewers who are struggling and would benefit from more coaching as well as interviewers who are nailing it and should get a shout-out.
We are a society that loves metrics. We turn to Yelp to get a take on restaurant choices and Rotten Tomatoes to assess our movie options. We have more sophisticated metrics to understand everything from traffic patterns to athletic performance.
So . . . why no interview metrics?
Some companies still see interviews as an intuitive process that requires art, magic, and improvisation to get it right. But by changing your view on interviewing and moving to a defined process with assigned roles and a standard script of questions, you can start to measure interviewer performance and make apples-to-apples comparisons.
And given all it has done since it rolled out earlier this year, the Interview Scorecard has earned a 5.
To receive blog posts like this one straight in your inbox, subscribe to the blog newsletter.