How do you assess employees?

Most businesses today undergo many ups and down and have their own cyclical nature. Under these tentative circumstances, does it then make sense to have predictive employee life cycles drawn out— especially when one does not have a long term visibility of the business?

When hiring a talent, one is often faced with a conventional question or observation – “There are too many changes in the profile” and a candidate is expected to justify or get defensive about this inquest from the interviewer. In most cases, the interviewer has no visibility of his own business beyond 1 to 3 years and here in an interview, s/he assumes the role of assessing a candidate’s position as a long term player, their scalability and leader of tomorrow among other things. Is this not conflicting with their intent and the actual reality?

When an interviewer provides no hedge to a prospective employee of guaranteed employment for life, s/he has no business to question longevity of the candidate beyond what they can see together as practical business visibility. Hiring for life when businesses currently refresh year on year or in many cases even shorter, how does this assessment make reasonable sense?

This brings me to the below questions:

-        Are we hiring talent for career?
-        Are we hiring talent for a role?
-        Are we hiring talent for a role and growth?

In the absence of this clarity through the lens of an employer, it makes absolute sense to view it from the lens of a candidate and promise a good experience to them during the tenure and to deliver it. Build it as stacks of good experience which actually displaces career tracks as there is no ideal career track in the world of today for most businesses. As an employer, allow it be an aggregation of good experiences which the employee collects over their lifetime and recalls with joy and pride in later years.

Predictive Employee Experiences - will be trending soon. My algorithm in this area begins now.