{"id":1116,"date":"2013-08-11T04:18:50","date_gmt":"2013-08-11T04:18:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.peaksalesrecruiting.comblog\/3-reasons-to-start-selecting-sales-hires-randomly\/"},"modified":"2023-03-08T19:43:18","modified_gmt":"2023-03-08T19:43:18","slug":"3-reasons-to-start-selecting-sales-hires-randomly","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.peaksalesrecruiting.com\/blog\/3-reasons-to-start-selecting-sales-hires-randomly\/","title":{"rendered":"3 Reasons To Start Selecting Sales Hires Randomly"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

When our research tracked 20,000 new hires, 46% of them failed within 18 months. But even more surprising than the failure rate, was that when new hires failed, 89% of the time it was for attitudinal reasons and only 11% of the time for a lack of skill. The attitudinal deficits that doomed these failed hires included a lack of coachability, low levels of emotional intelligence, motivation and temperament ~ Mark Murphy, Author of Hiring for Attitude, as well as the bestsellers Hundred Percenters and HARD Goals (quoted in Forbes Magazine).<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The way many sales managers hire, they might as well be making random choices. To be frank \u2014the results would probably be as good as what they are doing now, and possibly better.<\/p>\n

If your hiring success rate is less than stellar, you may want to start hiring randomly as well. To get you started, here are three completely random ways to choose your next sales rep:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Take the stack of resumes and throw them in the air with gusto\u2014really make them rain. The one that lands on top of the pile on the floor gets the job.<\/li>\n
  2. Crumple the resumes in to balls, and shoot them from increasingly farther distances into a waste bin basketball hoop. The resume that goes in from the greatest distance wins.<\/li>\n
  3. Ask the interns to review the current candidates and make a recommendation.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Of course, these ludicrous approaches would never work. But most sales job interviews aren\u2019t much better, and they are lousy predictors of how the candidate will perform on the job. Stephanie Clifford reported in an Inc. magazine article, \u201cThe New Science of Hiring,\u201d that standard interviews have only a \u201c.2 correlation with predicting success.\u201d What??<\/p>\n

    The price of failure is enormous (see What is the cost of a bad sales hire?<\/a>), but there is good news: sales and hiring managers can avoid these costs.\u00a0A study by Harvard University, showed that the vast majority of turnover can be directly connected to errors during selecting and hiring new employees.<\/p>\n

    Over the years, Peak has increasingly relied on scientific and behavioral techniques to assess candidates and their suitability for our customer\u2019s open sales positions. The 90%+ success rates of our candidates speak to the value of our methods but there is also more broad support for leveraging science in the hiring process. CEB, the world\u2019s leading member-based advisory organization, reports that firms that use assessment science to choose and develop sales reps get 16 percent better performance. In addition, employees are 50 percent more likely to continue working with the company rather than leave.<\/p>\n

    Why don\u2019t sales managers make more objective hiring decisions using proven scientific techniques? Many times they interview with methods they experienced when they were hired, using archaic questions and cheesy challenges. In other words, they don\u2019t know any better, nor do the other managers in the firm. They compound the problem when they add other errors as well, including:<\/p>\n