Is Your Hiring Process Science or Fiction?
“I knew the moment they walked in the door they were right for the job.”
Sound familiar?
How many times have we heard a manager say this—and how many times did that “perfect hire” end up derailing productivity, morale, or both?
If someone could show you a research-backed way to hire better—with methods proven to cut turnover from over 100% to under 20%—would you be interested?
Let’s start with the real question:
Is your hiring process built on science... or something closer to fiction?
The Fiction We Tell Ourselves
Fiction sounds like this:
“I can just tell if someone’s a good fit.”
“I’ve been doing this a long time—I know what to look for.”
“I ask questions that reveal how people really think.”
These statements feel confident. But after four decades in the people business, I’ve learned: confidence in a broken process is still a broken process.
Hiring is not a hunch. It’s not magic, instinct, or charm.
It’s a system. It’s data. It’s repeatable.
When Fiction Fools You: The Bias You Don’t See
Even experienced leaders fall into the trap of overvaluing unstructured interviews—trusting their gut, asking improvised questions, and interpreting answers based on intuition.
What does this sound like?
“Tell me about yourself.”
“Walk me through your resume.”
“Where do you see yourself in five years?”
“Do you think you’d be a good fit here?”
These may sound conversational—but they’re inconsistent, prone to bias, and poor predictors of success.
Fact: Unstructured interviews predict job performance only 20% of the time (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998). That’s barely better than flipping a coin.
The risks are subtle but dangerous:
First-impression bias: “I liked them immediately.”
Affinity bias: “They remind me of someone I used to work with.”
Confirmation bias: “I asked questions that confirmed my initial impression.”
When hiring is based on feelings, not facts, it’s not a process—it’s a gamble.
What Science Says Works
The landmark Schmidt & Hunter study analyzed 85+ years of hiring research. Here's what actually predicts performance:
Hiring Method Predictive Validity (r)
Structured Interviews .51
Cognitive Ability Assessments .51
Behavioral Assessments .30
Unstructured Interviews .38
Years of Experience .18
Education Level .10
Values and Motivation .20 estimated
Referece Checks .26
MH System Combined Methods Up to 0.75 (Structured Interview for Values, Motivations, Skills) + Cognitive and Behavioral Assessment to Job Targets
If your process is built on resumes, ad-libbed interviews, and gut instinct—your chance of success is about 1 in 5.
A structured, science-based approach can raise that to 3 out of 4.
The Worst-Case Scenario: When Bad Hires Stay
Turnover isn't the only metric that matters. In fact, it often hides the real problem.
Because the real cost of a bad hire isn’t in their exit—it’s in their presence.
They stay. And when they do, they often become:
High-maintenance employees who drain their supervisor’s time and patience
Sources of friction, constantly needing follow-up, correction, or attitude adjustments
Disruptors of team synergy, undermining trust and collaboration
Their impact compounds. Managers spend more time managing them than developing high performers. Team dynamics shift. Culture weakens.
And the cost? Consider the estimated expense per poor hire:
Production worker: $12,000
Admin staff: $20,000
Manager: $40,000+
Executive: $100,000+
(Sources: SHRM, Gallup, HBR, CareerBuilder)
Leadership IQ found that 46% of new hires fail within 18 months, and 89% of those failures are due to attitude, not skill.
They could do the job. They just wouldn’t do it the right way. And most of them didn’t leave.
They lingered—quietly damaging morale, culture, and customer experience.
This is why gut-based hiring isn't just ineffective. It's expensive.
The Montgomery Hassell Hiring System
We don’t guess. We don’t gamble. We built a system based on what works.
Our 4-part approach:
Behavioral Fit: Match natural tendencies to job demands using the Predictive Index Behavioral Assessment.
Cognitive Ability: Measure learning speed, adaptability, and problem-solving with PI Cognitive.
Motivation & Values: Assess internal drivers for cultural alignment.
Structured Interviewing: Role-specific, weighted scorecards ensure every candidate is evaluated fairly.
What this delivers:
Better hires from Day One
Lower turnover, higher retention
Improved engagement and performance
More time for supervisors to coach—not babysit
From Fiction to Fact-Based Hiring
“Commit to the Lord whatever you do, and He will establish your plans.” — Proverbs 16:3
That includes hiring. When we build our process with humility, structure, and wisdom, we set the foundation for excellence.
If your hiring process...
Relies on gut feel
Keeps producing underwhelming hires
Leaves managers stuck managing headaches
…it’s time to make a change.
Jim Collins said it best in Good to Great:
“First who... then what.”
The right people come first. Everything else follows.
So ask yourself:
Are your top performers hired by luck—or by design?
If it’s luck, you’re gambling with your company’s future.
Engagement Begins With Hiring
It doesn’t start with team-building exercises or values on the wall.
It starts with hiring people who fit—not just the job, but your culture and mission.
When you get that right, everything changes:
Teams click
Leaders grow
Customers notice
Culture strengthens
You don’t just hire talent. You build legacy.
Ready to Hire Better?
At Montgomery Hassell, we’ve helped companies reduce turnover, boost engagement, and build stronger teams with a hiring system rooted in behavioral science.
Want to learn what’s possible when your hiring process moves from fiction to fact?
Call us at 540-488-4234 for a no-pressure conversation.
No pitch. Just perspective. Let’s explore what hiring can look like when it’s built to work.
Because when you get the who right, the what always follows.