We're trying something new this month! Each of our workplace experts has weighed in on the following question from a reader to give you four points of view. Here's the question, with our experts' responses below:
In the stack of applications, we've received several from people who have significantly more work experience than I do. In an ordinary labor market, I'd say that they were overqualified, and have the standard concerns -- they don't really understand the position, they will want more money than we can offer. But in this economy, I get that there are people who understand the money and the job, are overqualified, but want it anyway. And I don't want to discriminate on the basis of age. Any suggestions for how to decide if they're worth considering? What interview questions should I be asking if I do interview them?
Here's the deal with hiring an overqualified candidate: Sometimes you end up with an employee who's bored and eager to move on to something more challenging, and sometimes you end up with an employee who will excel in the role and accomplish things you never thought you could get from that role before. Not all overqualified candidates are the same, and your job is to figure out which you're likely to get.
Too often when they're faced with an overqualified candidate, managers decide that they know what that person is all about, without even bothering to ask. They decide the person is just desperate for a paycheck right now and will leave when something better comes along, or they decide that the candidate must not realize how junior the job is. But in fact, there are plenty of excellent candidates out there who are deliberately looking for something less demanding or more junior than the roles they've held previously. Some people take on managerial roles and realize they hate it and want to go back to only being responsible for their own work. Other people want to focus on their families or other interests and don't want a job that's all-consuming. And you won't know who's who unless you ask.
So ask. Say it directly: "This position is much less responsibility and challenge than you've had previously. What interests you about that kind of move?" And then listen to how they respond. Do they sound sincere? Does their response resonate with you? If so, that's information worth considering.
Overqualification is an interesting concept. Selection systems are generally designed to eliminate the underqualified and create a comparison of ability between candidates. So someone being overqualified would seem to be a bonus. I suspect your concern is not that someone is overqualified. The concern, instead, is whether they are a good fit for the position, whether you can afford them, and if there will be a retention issue. Fortunately, these are easily addressed. For example, by being upfront with the salary for the position, you can eliminate the issue of pay right away.
When I am hiring for a position, I differentiate between screening questions and interview questions. Screening questions are asked immediately after a resume submission or application and they weed out (“select out”) inappropriate candidates. They have a way of highlighting red flags and obviously wrong candidates. In your case, screening questions might be about their desired salary or their expectations for the position. Interview questions, on the other hand, are presented to the top few candidates and are designed to narrow down (“select in”) the top candidates. Interview questions might include asking them why they want this position and asking them to make a case for why they are the best person for this role. Ask every candidate all the same questions and determine rating criteria and how you will evaluate candidates before you start.
It’s important to be methodical during the selection process because many of the concerns hiring managers have about overqualified candidates are based on stereotypes rather than reality. You do not want to miss out on top talent because of fear and ambiguous concerns. Be straightforward with the pay, the position, and the expectations. Examine the candidate in their entirety and what they can do for the organization—neither discount nor assign any extra weight to the fact that they may be “overqualified.”
First, let me say that I’ve interviewed some of the top leaders in this country during my career, and the one thing they all say is that one of the best moves they’ve made is surrounding themselves with smart people, who often knew more than they did. So I applaud your willingness to hire those with more experience than you – such a move may end up really helping your own career.
Second, while many “overqualified” people are more experienced, of course, chances are good they’re much more in touch with what they really want to do. Gunning for that next promotion may not be as high on their list of priorities, for example, as the desire to do work they enjoy or a need to feel that they’re contributing to an organization.
So, I’d ask things like: “Can you describe your favorite job from the past and what you did?” Or, “What did you not like doing in former jobs?” Look for things they love to do and you’ll have a better understanding if they’d be a good fit.
I suggest doing a phone screening first, and everyone above has great suggestions on what to say and ask during this first conversation. Your goal is to make sure the candidate understands the situation and is applying for the job for a good reason (e.g. a different sort of challenge, a schedule that allows for more work/life balance, etc.) rather than out of desperation.
If you like what you hear, bring them in and get a feel for how they would mesh with the organizational culture as well as you and your co-workers. You also want to get a sense of their level of enthusiasm and desire to stick with the organization for the long haul. Someone willing to take a less prestigious job because they are one foot out the door to retirement won't do you very much good.
And finally, in making a decision, remember that overqualified candidates (note that overqualified is sometimes used as a euphemism for "older") can often add much more value than less experienced ones because they tend to be more mature, loyal, and stable - and they've seen it all. As Anita mentioned, you will probably find yourself learning from them, which is a good thing!
Since this is a new format for us, we'd like to get your feedback on providing multiple answers to a reader question. Do you like this format? Do you have questions you'd like to have answered by our experts? Let us know!