Editorial
One of the biggest compliments I ever gave a hiring manager was about the clarity of mutual expectations during the recruitment process. Three months into the role, I told her, “This role is exactly how you described it.”
At the time, I don’t think I appreciated how atypical that statement was. All the big pieces were exactly as they had been described: strategic priorities, performance expectations, available resources, talent gaps, political landscape, high maintenance leaders, lagging employee engagement … it was pretty much spot on. At the 90-day mark, our CEO asked me for my first impressions, and I said the same thing to him, “It’s exactly how you said it would be.” Most importantly, I had said yes to what they promised me during the recruitment process. My career decision was sound in large part because I was afforded transparency and clarity during the courtship phase.
What Causes a Disconnect
Most companies understand the importance of effective onboarding. During those first 3-6 months, new employees form a sense of attachment to the organization — or not. My day-to-day existence presented very few surprises, which was not only empowering, but accelerated my ability to impact the business. Whether employees tell you or not, those first few months are when they are asking themselves, “Did I make the right decision? Do I belong here?”
When the expectations created during recruitment align with the realities experienced on the job, retention and satisfaction dramatically increase.
There’s an even more fundamental issue at play — the formation of trust. It’s like any new personal relationship. Imagine experiencing half-truths, guilt by omission, and/or misrepresentation of the facts, with no regard for the impact on you.
How would you feel about that individual?
Would you want to spend more time with them?
Do you believe they will act in your best interests?
Could you make sound decisions based on what they say and do?
In essence, do you trust them?
There are some logical, albeit unhelpful, reasons this disconnect happens. It could be as simple as new leaders or recruiters wanting to paint the “best” picture of the role to entice someone to join. Another possibility is the recruiter is being pressured to fill a critical role where talent is scarce. A third reason is the interviewers may not have been taught how to interview candidates effectively. They might perceive transparency as inappropriate, or that discussing the challenges of the role will scare away great talent.
Related Article: Thriving From Work, Not Thriving at Work
Conference
Sep
16
HR Tech Conference Las Vegas 2025
Register
Conference
Oct
27
Gartner HR Symposium/Xpo Orlando 2025
Register
Closing the Gap Between Expectations and Reality
In addition to vetting a candidate’s technical competence, a hiring manager needs to assess how readily they and their team can work with that individual. Are your communications style compatible? Do they demonstrate solid interpersonal skills that will help them understand and relate to other colleagues? How do they influence others and make decisions, especially in times of ambiguity?
Candidates are asking themselves all those same questions, but from their perspective as they seek to determine “Will I fit? Do I belong here?” They can’t self-assess fit without a clear understanding of their potential new reality, and that perspective should come through the hiring process, not from Glassdoor or Instagram. It won’t take the classic 90 days for a new employee to figure out that their reality has been misrepresented. Once they reach that conclusion, their foundational trust in your company and their new manager begins to erode. From there, the decision to join your organization begins to unravel.
Some tips to help prevent this:
Additional Perspective
Andre Martin, PhD, is a consultant, organizational psychologist, executive coach and author of "Wrong Fit, Right Fit: Why How We Work Matters More Than Ever."
Job descriptions are a seemingly necessary evil of the recruitment process and are the bane of many leaders’ and candidate’s experiences. Why? Mainly because job descriptions are an archaic tool designed for another time where work could be easily compartmentalized and broken down into specific and evergreen knowledge, skills and abilities.
Today’s jobs are much more fluid and get bigger and more complex every day. So, there is a decent chance that the job description a candidate was presented during recruitment will barely represent the job that is waiting for them when they arrive months later. The impact on engagement and productivity of this is clear. In a recent study of new joiners, one in three left their job in the first 90 days citing a “mismatch of expectations” as a major reason. Ugh.
What can we do? If you are a recruiter or hiring manager, tear up that job description and instead craft a Realistic Job Preview (RJP). The RJP should seek to honestly answer three key questions:
- How does work get done at the company? Be clear about how work gets done (how you collaborate, socialize ideas, set strategy, manage conflict, give feedback, make decisions, etc.). If the person’s way of working matches your company’s, you get fit for a career as opposed to a role. Far too often we under communicate how work happens and that leads to frustration downstream.
- What are the capabilities we need? Instead of talking about job responsibilities which change frequently, talk about the capabilities you and the team are missing and need to succeed. This information will allow the candidate to assess if there is a match between your needs and their superpowers.
- What are the top three deliverables for the next 12-18 months? Get crystal clear on what must be delivered to the company in the near-term — the outcomes, not the duties. By presenting these, it is easy for a candidate to assess if the role fits their past experiences and if they are motivated by the outcomes and activities.
- Teach your interviewers to offer a balanced view. Inexperienced interviewers might perceive they are being disloyal by sharing anything negative. Be explicit — a balanced view is not only OK, it's essential.
- Have candidates interview with colleagues doing comparable jobs to discuss the day-to-day realities of working in your company.
- Be prepared to answer these two questions: “How does a new hire becomes successful here?” and “What typically causes new hires to fail?”
- Reflect on how you might feel if you accepted a role and later discovered the promises of recruiting didn’t match the realities of retention. Reflecting in this way primes your brain to be more empathetic, and you are more likely to consider their needs in addition to those of the company.
- Expose candidates to differing perspectives during the interview process. Perspective taking is a foundational behavior to being inclusive, as it demonstrates greater transparency and a desire for candidates to reach their own conclusions.
Learn how you can join our contributor community.
