When you set out to select an accountant to assist you with filing your tax return, did you have each of those accountants provide you with a presentation with slides? How about your plumber? Your insurance agent? Each role requires the right person with the right expertise, but chances are your process for finding them did not involve a PowerPoint. And with good reason – while performing a presentation is a prized skill, performing isn’t what you primarily need them to do.
So, it’s worth asking why, in higher education particularly, we are so often stuck in the routine of mandating campus presentations in our hiring processes? This is especially true when the kinds of presentations we call for (on a topic of someone else’s choosing, in front of audiences we have never met) are often not the kinds of presentations that these professionals would be asked to give.
In theory, the campus presentation is supposed to highlight a candidate’s communication competence, content knowledge, ability to plan and organize their time, and engagement and interpersonal skills. In practice, however, the campus presentation rarely, if ever, delivers.
Presentations can quickly put a candidate in an uncontrolled environment.
When candidates enter a search, they expect to be part of an equitable and fair process. One of the most reliable ways to do this is to develop strategies that create controlled environments for the search process. We have found that throwing candidates into a presentation or open forum situation can get uncontrollable quickly!
As administrators, we all know the feeling we get in our stomachs during a post-presentation question and answer session. We look around the room, take a deep breath, and cross our fingers that the motley crew in attendance will not ask their usual questions. If you’ve ever felt fear or anxiety about what your audience might do, say, or ask, save the stress—cancel the presentation! No one has the bandwidth to manage the aftermath of an uncontrolled presentation.
Presentation preparation is time-consuming for candidates.
A candidate will typically invest multiple hours crafting their interview presentation. And I know you’re thinking, we told them not to spend much time on it. But here’s the reality: they will. Any serious candidate will dedicate time to perfecting their presentation because they understand, as do we, that preparation is key.
Chances are you’ve experienced both sides of this scenario. As candidates, we are obsessed with getting it just right. As hiring authorities, we worry about ensuring everyone has a say in the process. The culture on many campuses or organizations makes moving away from this tradition challenging because we’ve come to believe in its importance, and colleagues are accustomed to this approach. The misconception that 35 minutes in front of a crowd holds more value than six hours of interviews makes it hard to change the practice.
Presentations are often used to determine “fit.”
Too frequently, presentations become a way for evaluators to judge candidates based on the organization’s culture. What is known as a “gotcha” lens or “gotcha” culture will lead audience members to find all the ways a candidate does not match the current organization and ignore the talent that the candidate would bring. Moreover, the lens sees to it to catch every mistake or perceived mistake that a candidate makes. Since candidates are typically unfamiliar with organizational culture or individual measures of perfection, they are set up to fail from the start.
Complainers non-anonymous.
When presentations and open forums go wrong, it is often because audience members choose to make the presentation a space for their own catharsis, venting about current or past experiences. They use the time to ensure new candidates won’t repeat the mistakes of past leaders or to push for changes that address current issues.
It starts with a question, but really it’s more of a gripe, which then turns into a whine, and might not even be a real question at all. You’re laughing now, but we’ve all been there and maybe even done that. As a colleague of mine bluntly put it, “Who wants to be a part of a group of relentless complainers?” Definitely not the candidates hoping to join your team.
So, what’s next?
It’s high time to reconsider this ancient ritual of campus hiring – and the good news is there are many paths forward!
Consider the following:
- Rather than a presentation, consider organizing larger interview groups with key stakeholders, such as the department or unit that the candidate will join. These larger interviews should have scripted questions to maintain an equitable search process.
- If you must have an open forum, consider organizing “by invitation only” sessions, typically involving the search committee, the hiring authority, and relevant campus partners. Gathering smaller and more specific groups gives you more control around what a candidate is asked and speaks more to the intended purpose of the open forum—an opportunity to ask candidates pertinent and specific questions.
- If you must have a presentation, consider incorporating it using a webinar format, where questions can only be submitted through a moderator. This allows you to evaluate knowledge and skill of the candidate while also protecting the integrity of the process.
- Do you need more people to meet the candidate? Consider including a classic meet-and-greet in the interview schedule. In this setting, you can ask the candidate to give a brief self-introduction to the group. It may be helpful to assign a host to stay with the candidate throughout the event to ensure they feel comfortable.
- Consider a moderated and well-facilitated question and answer session with select stakeholders. This could involve a small group of campus partners who submit their questions in advance. It’s essential to have a moderator in place to avoid rogue or inappropriate interview questions—especially at this stage!! You can be creative here; some clients have used various technological tools to collect and review questions in real-time, while more straightforward methods like paper or text submissions are equally effective.
In summary, by focusing more on creating dynamic, interactive approaches—such as moderated question and answer sessions, targeted discussions with key stakeholders, and informal meet-and-greets—you can better assess a candidate’s true potential for success. These alternatives reduce the pressure on candidates and are far less time consuming. These options reduce the risk of the organization not putting their best foot forward, allow for a more equitable process, and support a more authentic atmosphere for candidate evaluation.
Happy Recruiting!