“How do I make sure the person I’m interviewing is actually the right person for the job?”
Like many of you, I’ve asked myself that question throughout every manager and sales recruitment process I’ve driven.
Over time, though, I’ve come to a few conclusions that have been reinforced every time I hire:
- The ideal candidate doesn’t exist. A job description should be a guide, not a pilot-style checklist where every box has to be ticked.
- A CV gets someone through the door. It doesn’t define the candidate. The past is an indication, not a guarantee of future performance.
- Resilience is essential for salespeople, especially in an environment where few situations can be fully anticipated and uncertainty is the only constant.
To increase the chances of getting the right answer to that first question, many companies ask candidates to prepare a business case based on a detailed brief provided in advance. Sometimes those briefs are extremely comprehensive.
Yet whenever my HR colleagues have suggested this approach to me, I’ve turned it down.
Here’s why:
- The framework is often too restrictive. It encourages candidates to “perform” and can limit their natural expression during the interview. They end up defending their case rather than simply showing us how they think.
- It only represents one possible scenario. The new hire will face countless situations that look nothing like the case they were given.
- A detailed case tends to produce a detailed answer. The interviewer can easily end up focusing on the quality of the response rather than on the person behind it.
- Most importantly, it introduces a bias into the assessment. You end up comparing a candidate with no experience in your company to colleagues who work on real-life cases every day and already know the business inside out.
I prefer my own approach. It tells me just as much before the interview as it does during it.
Once the interview date is set, I systematically call the candidates and ask them to prepare an answer to just one question:
“You’ve got the job. What do you do?”
Their first reaction is usually to ask what format I expect.
My answer is always the same: whatever format you want. Freestyle.
And that’s when different profiles start to emerge.
- Some candidates ask me more questions during our conversation, trying to understand my expectations beyond what is written in the brief.
- Others take note of the request and come back by email a few days before the interview to clarify something or ask additional questions.
- Others simply take note of it, and I hear their answer for the first time when we meet.
There’s no right or wrong approach. But taking the initiative to strengthen the relationship, create an opportunity to clarify the scope and qualify the need from the outset is something I value. It’s already a first signal.
After that initial conversation, and before the interview, there are again two possibilities: some candidates send me their work in advance, while others wait until the day itself.
Again, neither is right or wrong. But having the presentation beforehand allows me to come into the conversation better prepared and ask sharper questions.
Then comes the interview.
Two things are important to make clear:
- The exercise never replaces the traditional parts of an interview.
- I never expect a candidate to demonstrate the same level of expertise as colleagues who have already spent several years in the role.
This exercise has shown me a wide range of working styles.
Again, there’s no right or wrong answer, although there are perhaps two extremes:
- Two printed PowerPoint slides: a slogan on the first, a few business quotes on the second.
- Or a large Excel file with several tabs.
During the discussion around the case, there are four things I pay particular attention to.
- Communication and clarity
Does the candidate get to the point? Does the message come through, or does it get lost in unnecessary detail?
A strong candidate can make a convincing point in very few words.
- Listening and interaction
Are we having a conversation, or am I sitting through a presentation?
Does the candidate check that I’m following their thinking, or simply run through their plan regardless of my reactions? Are they looking for my input, or genuinely building the discussion with me?
The way they respond to questions about their own document can tell me a lot.
- Command of the material
Do they simply read through a document I’ve often already read, or do they use it as a starting point for the conversation?
The real value begins when they go beyond what’s written on the page.
- The bigger picture
Do their answers stay within the boundaries of their own role, or can they connect their subject to the wider challenges of the organisation?
Can they step back and think about collaboration across the business, or do they remain locked into their case?
Does their thinking include a timeline and measurable outcomes? Does the work connect to the company’s actual challenges and to the ambition attached to the role?
When faced with the unexpected, the candidate can no longer rely on what they prepared.
What’s left is the way they build an answer in real time, in front of you, without a safety net.
And that is exactly what the job will ask them to do, week after week.
