I am constantly staggered at how a company will invest its time in choosing a new piece of capital asset versus hiring a new employee.
As recruiters of C-suite Leaders we are for ever battling to gain the attention of companies to really invest time to understand everything about the Leader they want and need to appoint for the prosperity of their business. The investment into a piece of capital equipment really is taken seriously and usually follows a robust process to minimise risk and maximise profitability. Recruitment is seen in a totally different light and far too many involved are willing to take risks with the safety net that they can resolve a wrong appointment through dismissal! This really isn't the appproach I would recommend.
Investing time to develop a robust recruitment process that looks under every available stone of a candidate's experience and behaviour set will minimise risk and maximise your ROI. It will also minimise the prospect of appointing a TOXIC employee who will leave a path of destruction that will take for more than a simple dismissal to rectify!!
Nothing is more costly to an organization’s culture than a toxic employee. Research shows that rudeness is like the common cold — it’s contagious, spreads quickly, and anyone can be a carrier. Dylan Minor, a visiting assistant professor at Harvard Business School, and Michael Housman, chief analytics officer at Cornerstone OnDemand, studied just how costly toxic employees are using a large dataset of nearly 60,000 workers across 11 firms in various industries, including communications, consumer services, financial services, health care, insurance, and retail. How does hiring a toxic employee compare to hiring a superstar? Minor and Housman found that one toxic employee wipes out the gains for more than two superstars.