星空传媒

Have you ever looked on in horror as your brand new senior project manager flounders in a meeting, or misjudges the audience and sends the client out the door in a huff? Ever felt that creeping unease as the high flyer poached from your competitor is starting to be shunned by your whole senior management team?

Face it, hiring the wrong person for a senior role is a big risk, and one to which construction is prone because of a dangerous cocktail of circumstances: a sustained boom has left a management skills gap, recruiters tend to focus on technical ability over softer skills, and word spreads fast about a person鈥檚 reputation, even though reputations may be as much fiction as fact.

The risk can be severe in smaller firms, where the pressure is on to fill the vacancy fast, and where everybody in the management team has vital, client-facing roles.

When interviewing for that senior post, we鈥檝e got to move beyond the usual mix of gut-instinct and wishful thinking, according to business psychologist Charles Woodruffe, who vets potential candidates in sectors outside construction.

He says the blowback from a hasty or misjudged appointment is serious and widespread, affecting not only a firm鈥檚 morale, but its bottom line, too. 鈥淚t鈥檚 a downward spiral,鈥� Woodruffe says. 鈥淭he person doesn鈥檛 have other people鈥檚 confidence and they lose confidence in themselves. Mistakes get noticed and successes don鈥檛. Small problems turn into big ones.鈥�

The situation is also hard on staff further down the line. 鈥淭hey have to cover for them and they start thinking, why the hell am I doing this? It鈥檚 a demoralising experience for everybody.鈥�

So why does it happen in the first place? Sometimes it鈥檚 because recruiters give insufficient thought to defining the post they鈥檙e trying to fill. Maybe what they really need is a seasoned charmer who can handle difficult client relationships, but in an interview they鈥檙e wowed by a candidate鈥檚 skill in technical problem solving, failing to notice 鈥� or choosing to ignore 鈥� his or her blunt manner.

It鈥檚 also because smaller firms don鈥檛 know how to fully assess a candidate. Woodruffe says there are tools available, such as detailed interviews and psychometric testing, designed to give a more accurate picture of the person in question. Some may sell themselves superbly in interviews, but lack critical thinking ability.

There are also tests to probe the 鈥渄arker side鈥� of a candidate鈥檚 personality, predicting where positive attributes like confidence, charm and independence might tip over, under stress, into negatives like arrogance, manipulation and aloofness.

But what if the inappropriate candidate has already signed on the dotted line? Woodruffe has consulted in such situations and says it鈥檚 not too late even then to limit the damage.

The first step may be coaching, to try and make the 鈥渨rong鈥� person 鈥渞ight鈥�. But he stresses you shouldn鈥檛 rule out the possibility that maybe the organisation has something to learn.

鈥淲e might not be taking the side of the firm,鈥� he says. 鈥淢aybe their culture is just intolerant and it may be actually very difficult to find anyone who meets its demands.鈥�

Clearly, though, getting the right fit first must be a priority for an industry like construction, where personal 鈥渃hemistry鈥� is key.