What's your process for hiring? I'll be you spend hours pouring over resumes, set a few appointments and have the promising candidates meet several decision makers before coming to a conclusion that their background, training and experience is just right. Yet, with that format, you're bound to find the mistakes that come with ignoring the 'soft' side of the employee: their behavioral style, attitudes, core beliefs and values that can have a real impact on performance. Now, imagine that hundreds of times over when, simultaneously, you inherit a company full of unknowns with a single merger. Need a bottle of aspirin?



How can an astute company (with a willing and pro-active merger partner) reduce the risk of sinking their deal on issues they neglected to consider before they wrote the contract? I won't make you guess; here's the answer: proven and accurate behavioral or attitude assessments are the ideal technique to achieve the goal. Companies who routinely hire individuals for replacement or new positions are wise to benchmark the behavioral style or attitudes and values of the applicant who's best suited to fill the job. How do you know what the job really needs, from the standpoint of 'soft skills' to be done truly as you envisioned? With a benchmark profile in hand and relevant interview questions, applied equally to all candidates, promising interviewees can then be assessed to see how closely they match the ideal, assuming they also have the requisite education, training and experience for the position.

Imagine then, if a company took its own profile, as a collective employer? It would have clarity around the type of behavior, values and attitudes that, on a general yet collective and cohesive basis, have contributed to its success (and we'll assume success is there or why would the merger partner be interested?). The principals at the top would then be able to compare their corporate profile with that of their proposed partner. Compatible? Great! Not so compatible? Well, what does each company have to change or compromise to make this marriage work? Is it worth the effort? Can they quantify the cost of the added time necessary to bring the partners to cultural employee parity?

Imagine how much friction could be reduced with this pro-active stance! Imagine how this technique would strengthen the bond between the two, formerly separate entities and their new colleagues. Imagine the enhanced speed of recouping the investment, enhanced productivity, reduced employee turnover? Can anyone find a way to help companies see the light? Probably have to put it clearly in dollars potentially gained or changed share price to make them hear because, so far, there's no bailout for mismatched corporate marriage partners......