…Reading this post from HR Pro Tim Sackett on the tendency of organizations to gravitate towards external candidates when filling open positions, I couldn’t help but fixate on the cause of this phenomenon.
To be sure, there is a significant value add in bringing in fresh faces: External hires infuse an organization with – among other things – new ideas, perspectives, and energy. With that said, I don’t think the desire to escape complacency and a “this-is-how-we’ve-always-done-it” mentality is the central reason that most companies pass on seemingly qualified internal candidates for vacant and/or new roles.
To Sackett’s point, I think that after being with an organization for a year or more that much of a new hire’s luster wears off. Management gets a clearer 1. As opposed to what they shared during the interview process.picture of the employee’s strengths and weaknesses 1, and the now not-so-new hire is effectively siloed, their brand defined by the balance of their work to date.
As an HR guy who has seen his share of fresh faces, this process is always fascinating for me to behold. The shiny new toy gradually becomes taken for granted and (sometimes, eventually) undervalued. Managers lose sight of what their existing employees are capable of, and in the process often lose their engagement.
Still… there is another side to this coin. Rarely is the energy and enthusiasm displayed by a candidate during the interview process and early days of a role persistent past the first year of employment. Instead, it gradually diminishes and then levels off. Ergo, managers and team members that come to take their colleagues for granted do so because – at least in part – said colleague contributes to this process through their own apathy and complacency in a role over time. In such instances, that makes internal talent being passed over at least a little to blame, yes?
…Or maybe I have this wrong. As always, please let me know in the comments section below.