There is no doubt that some of my Lawcruiter colleagues would want me – not entirely in jest -
to suggest that a list of “best practices” for our clients would include “Hire more of our Candidates (and Stop Being so Picky)” and “Raise our Fees”.
This list, however, is intended for those of our clients which are not so desperate to grow – but who are nonetheless interested in rationalizing and improving their lateral hiring procedures.
- Well Written Job Descriptions: It cannot be overstated. The more substantive and specific detail a firm includes in its job descriptions – and the more information and data points the firm makes available to Lawcruiters - the greater the likelihood that it will receive more “on point” resumes (and fewer irrelevant resumes) for that search.
- Feedback: For all the talk equating lateral hiring to sausage making (read: most people don’t want to know the details), there is an enormous amount that Lawcruiters can learn from their clients as to the thinking that goes into a decision to hire or not. Few details are too trivial. Certainly, a lack of responsiveness by a partner to a candidate application needs to be explained – even if to say that the partner in question is too busy to address the resume. Unless there are time restrictions, most people - busy lawyers included - can be reasonably patient. No feedback, in these circumstances, is simply disrespectful both to the candidate and to the client's reputation in the lateral hiring market. Needless to say that the most successful searches, in my experience, are those where there is a clearly designated partner contact to give detailed feedback to Lawcruiters as to the details of the search and as to the candidates that are under consideration.
- A Clearly Defined Process (Speed!) – Fewer things are more compelling to candidates than a firm whose lateral hiring process moves quickly and efficiently through the interview process through to an offer. A clearly defined, well planned process includes, besides designated partner contacts – interview teams with pre-arranged blocks of availability; a streamlined decision making process; efficient conflicts clearing and reference gathering; efficient offer-letter generation, etc. Just as a hiring manager loves enthusiasm in a candidate – a candidate loves enthusiasm in a firm. The easiest way of showing this is by implementing an efficient hiring process
- Well Prepared, Highly Motivated Interviewers: The people who interview a candidate, represent the “face” the firm shows to candidates. In a competitive lateral hiring market – firms can do no better that to assign their most enthusiastic and committed members the task of showing that face to the candidate world. (Conversely – a firm can do no worse than assign interviewing responsibilities to the wrong people.) Best practices would include: careful selection of “the best, the brightest and the most enthusiastic” to conduct the interviews; ensuring that the same team interviews all of the clients; training the team in proper interviewing techniques; ensuring that the team understands the parameters of the search so that it can reasonably achieve the firm’s hiring targets; ensuring that this team is given credit for the time spent interviewing candidates; and periodically “checking in” to see that the team’s enthusiasm has not flagged.
- A Plan and a Bottom Line: It is almost axiomatic that the intensity of a firm’s hiring needs exists in inverse proportion to the time partners have to conduct interviews and make hiring decisions. In the most intense moments, Lawcruiters often see their clients react to a manpower crisis in one of two ways: (1) hiring decisions are deferred because everyone is otherwise too busy; or (2) careless decisions are made – resulting in inappropriate hires. My sense is that both of these sub-optimal reactions are the direct result of a lack of planning. Ultimately, a practice group and firm should know how broadly they will look and under what circumstances – specifically - would hiring criteria be relaxed and by how much. A plan, with some “bottom line” criteria - combined with a clearly defined hiring process and properly trained interviewing teams - would, at the very least, keep the process going.
