The Dilemma of Two Good Options

Sometimes when you have one spot to fill, you find you have a great problem: More than one outstanding option to fill that spot.

Back in the day, I was doing a ton of recruiting for my boutique consulting firm after we had experimented with an outsourced recruiting process and discovered that using independent recruiters who did not really understand our business led to recruiting failure after recruiting failure. As my senior management peers and I reflected on our experiences and applied our skills in process improvement, we discovered a few lessons learned that I continue to use to this day. One of the most important was that it is better to pick the best of a slate than to evaluate each candidate for adequacy independently.

Generate a slate of candidates

To pick the best of a slate, you first have to drive a process that generates a slate to choose from. That means being disciplined about identifying enough qualified candidates that you end up with several who are excellent and who make the decision between them quite difficult. Mind you, do not lower your standards. Ideally, it should be a real struggle to decide who is the best fit for the spot you have available. Of course, you will ultimately need to make a choice. I have only once decided just to hire both instead of making a choice.

Essentially, you have to work hard to find candidates that will present you with the dilemma of two (or more) good options to choose from. Frankly, if I have more than one position to fill, I will try to ensure that my process generates at least two attractive candidates for each open position. My goal is to create the “slate” dynamic of choosing the best, not just assessing for adequacy.

So, once you have created the dilemma of two good options, now what?

Inevitably, as you seek out and evaluate candidates, you learn things about what you are looking for and what might be most important. Presumably, you started with a description of the characteristics of your target candidates. Think about your multiple excellent finalist candidates. What are some of the differentiators between candidates that stand out now that you have reached the finalist stage? For example, do your finalists vary in the amount or type of experience they have? Is there a tradeoff between aptitude or personality traits and demonstrated expertise? Are there differences in style or personality that may mean one is a better cultural fit with your startup or a better personality fit with the type of work in the position? 

Before deciding between your good option finalists, step back and leverage what you have learned in the recruiting process to date by considering how those learnings might update what you thought was most important for success in the role when you began the process. This is often an excellent exercise to do with all those involved in evaluating potential candidates to date. Reconsider whatever dimensions might be relevant and then reflect on which dimensions are most likely to lead to success in the role. Now update and prioritize that list to define better the nature of the gap in your team that you are trying to fill.

Determine the best fit

Now use your refined target to evaluate your finalist candidates. Be sure to do excellent due diligence on your finalists. Another interview perhaps to flesh out open questions concerning your newly refined criteria? Check with references on the most critical aspects? Consider a practical skills evaluation of some sort? Which candidate meets your goals the best?

Once you have a favorite, proceed to make an offer while keeping the other finalist in reserve in case you lose your first choice for some reason.

One of the best outcomes of being disciplined enough to develop a slate of great candidates is that you are often similarly excited about two finalists. That means you have an attractive backup option that can be especially valuable in a competitive recruiting environment. We are just completing our seventh recruiting process this year, and in every case, we are thrilled with who we hired – and, in every case, we had a second-place candidate who was absolutely superb and likely would have also been a great hire.  We are leveling up our team with outstanding new members, which is worth all the countless hours invested in a robust recruiting process.