Disproving Opinions Using Data
Opinions are like coffee orders - everyone's got one, they're all vastly different and everyone always thinks theirs is the best.
Opinions on recruitment success can vary just as much across an organisation. But opinions, as we know, aren’t facts. Data, on the other hand, can easily reveal the real story.
Here are some of the opinions we hear all the time, but when we dig into the data, we're able to show them the truth.
“Not that many people leave.”
What exactly qualifies as ‘too many’ when it comes to employee turnover? 5? 15? In any business, some level of attrition is normal - it’s never going to be zero. But how do you know when it’s becoming a problem?
What does the data say?
Pull up your payroll stats, and see how many people have left in the past 12 months. For even more insight, compare that to the number of new starters. When you put the numbers in front of stakeholders, the reality of your turnover rate can’t be ignored.
We recently did this for one client and the number wasn't especially high, but it was higher than they thought. And that was enough for them to take action.
“People leave for all sorts of reasons.”
If you ask around internally, you’ll hear a hundred different reasons why people leave. But here’s the thing: research has consistently shown that most employees leave for one of three reasons:
They don’t get along with their manager,
They don’t see opportunities for growth, or
They get a better offer elsewhere.
Now, when early leavers - those who quit within their first year - exit, it’s easy to dismiss it as “they weren’t the right fit” or “they just didn’t work out.” It’s more comfortable to blame the individual that's no longer around, than to admit there might have been a flaw in the hiring process.
But by dismissing or placating, nothing changes, the same issues will keep popping up.
What does the data say?
Refine and interrogate your exit interviews. Ask the tough questions and dig deep to uncover the real reasons behind why people are leaving. We like using these questions:
Were there any aspects of your role or the company that frustrated you?
Did you feel supported in your role, PD and career growth?
Were there any aspects of the company culture that didn’t align with your values or expectations?
What would have made you stay?
Would you consider returning to this company in the future? Why or why not?
“I’ll know the right person for the role when I see them.”
We’ve all heard it before: the idea that hiring managers often believe they can identify the best candidate based on gut feeling, or cultural fit. While intuition can play a role, relying on subjective judgement can lead to unconscious bias, overlooking top talent, or repeating the same hiring mistakes.
What does the data say?
Start by analysing past hiring decisions. What qualities or experiences did your top performers have? How about those who didn’t work out as well? By implementing structured interviews and assessments, like psychometric testing or competency-based questions, you can create a more objective and consistent hiring process that leads to better outcomes.
“We don’t need a full on strategy, just use Seek.”
There’s a belief out there that as long as you’re posting jobs and reviewing resumes, you don’t need a comprehensive hiring strategy. But without a clear plan, hiring becomes a reactive process, leading to rushed decisions, mismatches, and higher turnover.
What does the data say?
Look at your hiring timelines, turnover rates, and how well your hires align with your long-term business goals. A well-defined hiring strategy - one that includes workforce planning, employer branding, and talent pipeline development - can reduce time-to-hire, improve the quality of hires, and ultimately, support your company’s overall goals.
By analysing one clients' hiring processes we uncovered a fair few surprises for them including the fact that 3 long-term employees held significant power over the hiring and onboarding success even though there huge misalignment on what good looked like. An unsuccessful hire was costing the business $70k+ and their attrition rate was higher than their sector standard. And that was just the start.
Looking at only the facts, we we able to tweak components of their processes and add in whole sections of a hiring strategy that were missing but necessary for improving their hiring game.
What other opinions have you come across that you'd like to disprove?
