7 Common Recruiting Mistakes (and How to Avoid Making Them)

Maybe you emailed the wrong candidate, letting that guy who totally bombed the interview know that he got the job . . . and then had to rescind the offer five minutes later. Or maybe you just scheduled a super-important meeting — for a Saturday.

We all make mistakes and we often learn a valuable lesson from them. But some of the biggest recruiting mistakes are ones that you might not even realize you’re making.

With that in mind, below are seven of the most common mistakes recruiters make, along with tips on what you should do to make sure you don't make them. 

1. Asking predictable questions that lead to canned answers and reveal nothing about the candidate

Arcane brain teasers fell out of favor some time ago, so both recruiters and candidates can breathe a sigh of relief knowing they’ll never again have to discuss the number of ping-pong balls that can fit into a 747 (22,870,000, just in case). But don’t make the mistake of reverting back to simple, predictable interview questions instead.

The problem with basic or boilerplate questions — think “What’s your greatest weakness?” or “Tell us about a time you faced a challenge at work” — is that candidates will hit you right back with canned, rehearsed answers.

You can still throw candidates a curveball — just make sure it actually reveals something about who they are.

“If you want to actually learn a thing or two, ask questions you don’t know the answer to, and ones for which the candidate can’t prepare,” writes Aviva Leebow Wolmer, Vistage chair at Vistage Worldwide.

Every high-powered interviewer has their own favorite question, but they tend to share a common goal of knocking the candidate out of their comfort zone and forcing them to actually think about the answer. If you can do that, you’ll get a response that reveals something about a candidate’s ability to problem-solve and think on their feet.

“One unique inquiry I have used is, ‘Tell me something that’s true that almost nobody agrees with you on,’” Aviva says. “This is a mind bender that will really force the candidate to think quickly.”

2. Equating education and experience with skills

It’s hard not to be wowed by certain candidates’ resumes, especially when they come loaded with Ivy League degrees or years of experience at a Fortune 100 company. But education and experience pale compared to the most important asset a candidate can brandish: the skills to do the job.

To find out if someone has the necessary chops, ask questions that will elicit insights into their soft skills and be ready to assess for hard skills. 

Eighty-two percent of companies use some form of preemployment screening. It’s a great way to find out whether someone really speaks fluent Mandarin (as their resume claims) or are the coding whiz they purport to be. There are a number of skills assessments you can use, including those offered by LinkedIn. But here’s the caveat: Skills tests only work if you pay attention to the results. According to an article in the Harvard Business Review, researchers “found that even when companies conduct such tests, hiring managers often ignore them — and when they do [ignore the results], they get worse hires.”

Whenever possible, also drop the four-year-degree requirement in your job postings, especially for “middle skills” jobs, which have traditionally required more than a high school diploma but less than a college degree. By asking for a college diploma, you drastically shrink your talent pool, even though a nondegreed worker may be the perfect fit. 

3. Not staying in touch with candidates to keep them “warm” through the entire hiring process

“The job market is as hot as ever,” Fast Company writes, “with the threat of a ‘Great Resignation’ on the horizon.”

And with talent so in demand, it’s a good idea to keep in mind that top candidates won't always be willing to endure a long, drawn-out hiring process. Even if they prefer your opportunity, they may take a different offer if they haven't heard from you in weeks. So, you can make life easier for candidates, external and internal, by keeping the contact warm and checking in throughout the hiring process, even if there isn’t really any news to deliver.

Stacy Zapar, founder of The Talent Agency, makes sure her candidates don’t ever feel like she’s left them hanging.

“You’ll never go into a weekend without hearing from me,” Stacy says. “Even if there’s no news, I’ll let you know.”

Stacy blocks off time on Friday afternoons, when she knows she won’t be interviewing, to touch base with candidates who are still waiting on a follow-up. If that doesn’t work for your schedule, try setting reminders that alert you to shoot off a quick message once a week to candidates who are on hold.

4. Relying on external candidates only 

Back in the day when employees typically stayed at one organization their entire career — roughly from the end of World War II through the 1970s — companies filled 90% of their vacancies through promotions and lateral moves. Today, that figure is a third or less. Remember that your best candidate may already be in-house. 

There are many reasons why you might want to hire internally. It takes less time and money to source talent (and saves on relocation costs). It allows for faster onboarding and ramping up. It’s also easy to get an accurate snapshot of what a candidate’s recent performance has been. 

Even better, internal recruiting improves retention. According to LinkedIn’s Global Talent Trends 2020 report, employees stay 41% longer at companies that regularly hire from within. 

Encourage your company to post all openings internally and then take an active role in identifying in-house candidates and reaching out to them. Once you’ve found them, have your internal candidates go through the same interview process and skills assessment you use with external ones. 

You’ll also want to address the concerns of hiring managers, who often don’t want to lose good employees to other teams. Sit down with managers and share data and anecdotal evidence that show how internal mobility helps the company — and how the process can help them build their own teams too. 

5. Focusing on culture fit — or the “beer test” — instead of culture add

For several years now, forward-looking companies have looked for “culture add” rather than “culture fit” as they work to diversify their workforces. Culture add is about hiring people who align with your core values but also add unique skills, viewpoints, or life experiences that will help us grow as a team and a business. In fact, if you’re still hiring candidates because you think they would fit in well with your existing team, there’s a good chance you’re succumbing to unconscious biases that harm diversity efforts.

Often referred to as the “beer test” — as in, would you want to hoist a pint with this candidate? — decades of recruiting have shown that focusing on culture fit leads to a lack of diversity in teams. And research reveals that a lack of diversity also means a lack of innovation and a tendency to underperform overall.

So, it’s time to rethink the search for culture fit. To move beyond this kind of conformity bias, some recruiters use “blind hiring” techniques, like removing candidates’ names from their resumes or using voice-distorting software to disguise their gender. Some teams have even turned to AI, letting tech tools scan resumes or screen candidates. While these tactics may seem extreme, they’ve also led to reductions in hiring bias, which suggests the results are probably worth the effort.

6. Automatically passing on “overqualified” candidates 

If you routinely reject candidates because you think they’re overqualified, perhaps you should think again. 

Sure, there are reasons an overqualified candidate may give you pause. Hiring managers may not want to hire someone who has more experience than they do and may overshadow them. And there’s always the risk that an employee will get bored and move on. Or they may want too high a salary. 

Most seasoned employees understand, though, that career-long compensation tends to rise and fall over time, rather than continue as an ever-rising line. There may also be a reason why an experienced candidate wants to work at your company — even if it’s a step down and pays less. If, for example, your company offers better work-life balance than their previous employer, they may jump at the chance. And after the job losses caused by COVID, a number of seemingly overqualified people will be looking for work.

Here’s why you should give these candidates a second look: They’re often quicker to train and need less supervision. They can serve as mentors for younger, less-experienced managers and individual contributors. For a manager who is going places, they may also make succession planning easier. And they can bring fresh ideas and perspectives, based on their experience. If you’re concerned about whether their skills are up-to-date or whether they’re quick learners, ask them, “What have you learned recently?” Also, test their skills. 

An engaged, experienced worker can drive innovative change and improve the bottom line, which only reflects well on the manager — making an overqualified hire a win-win. 

7. Failing to follow up when you don’t get a response from a candidate you’ve sourced

Here’s a mistake that’s easy to make: You send a message to a promising candidate, don’t hear anything back, and move on.

The reality is, one message is rarely enough — and it’s worth sending a couple more to get a response after you’ve already put time and energy into sourcing. You should always be looking for new ways to stir passive candidates into action, and sending them a single, generic message is often not going to cut it.

A lot of top talent is already getting inundated with messages from eager recruiters, so they may be desensitized to your pitch. To stand out from the crowd, you’ll have to craft an engaging message with a subject line that leaves candidates eager to find out what comes next — and you may have to send it more than once or twice to get their attention.

According to Stacy, a three-step process is ideal. Stacy gets about a 45% response rate for her initial messages. A quick and to-the-point follow-up sent a couple days later boosts that number up to 65%. And if that doesn’t work, she’ll send one more thank-you note a few days later, using a phrase like “Let’s stay in touch down the road” to create urgency. After that third message, Stacy’s response rate is a whopping 85%.

Jeremy Schmidt, director of global talent acquisition at Codility, will use jokes, admissions of ignorance, or even poems to get prospects to respond. “I mean, come on,” he says, “who isn’t going to respond to the recruiter that sends them a poem?” He’s also been known to boost his chances by having a mutual connection send the next message for him.

Jeremy believes persistence pays. He stayed after one prospect who didn’t respond until Jeremy’s ninth message. And then Jeremy hired them.

To receive blog posts like this one straight in your inbox, subscribe to the blog newsletter.