Source Code: Your daily look at what matters in tech.

source-codesource codeauthorKevin McAllisterNoneWant your finger on the pulse of everything that's happening in tech? Sign up to get David Pierce's daily newsletter.64fd3cbe9f
×

Get access to Protocol

Your information will be used in accordance with our Privacy Policy

I’m already a subscriber
People

Why you should use more data in your hiring process

EQT Ventures' Zoe Jervier Hewitt thinks that making hiring as scientific as possible is the route to fairness, diversity and better hires.

Why you should use more data in your hiring process

Zoe Jervier Hewitt's mission at EQT Ventures is to inject data into all aspects of talent management.

Photo: Courtesy of EQT Ventures

Zoe Jervier Hewitt wishes you'd stop thinking about hiring and HR as the soft side of business.

As a talent partner at EQT Ventures, she helps the firm's portfolio companies to recruit and manage their staff. But her focus is on making performance management and executive hiring more analytical to simultaneously help founders move away from using gut feelings to make decisions while making their pipeline for leadership teams and board seats more diverse.

That often means changing the minds of headstrong founders and having difficult conversations about the systems they have put in place. But Jervier Hewitt has found that cold, hard data is often the best way to tackle that, which is why she pushes companies to quantify as much as the hiring process as possible.

And she thinks we're only just at the start of a longer journey to improve the hiring process. "We're going to see such heightened engagement in data and evidence and psychology in everything to do with talent selection and talent development," she said. "I think you can be as data-driven and as informed from an evidence point of view with HR-related decisions as you are with all the other aspects of running a company."

In an interview with Protocol, Jervier Hewitt spoke about the best ways to quantify talent, how she approaches D&I topics with founders and the strategies she uses to coach executives to think differently about HR.

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

As a talent partner advising on hiring decisions, what does the data-driven piece actually look like throughout the process?

HR and talent have a reputation for being the softer part of business, and there's a lot of gut feel, which results in bias. I think you can be as data-driven and as informed from an evidence point of view with HR-related decisions as you are with all the other aspects of running a company. So my personal agenda and how I support these companies is asking how I can help them buy into the idea that people in leadership is the lever for growth and is the most important thing to focus on.

Secondly, I ask how I can help them become more data-driven and evidence-based in the way that they're running those functions. To give you an example, in talent acquisition, I spend a lot of my time with founders before we even start the search [for employees]. What are you looking for? What is the role here? What are the specific skills and competencies and behaviors and values that you need to show up in in the perfect candidate? And it might sound sort of obvious, but you would be surprised at how many founders really skip that preparation part and just go straight to market to start interviewing all these candidates without actually having a clear framework or a scorecard around what we're assessing.

I try to make the assessment setup really watertight, and I find that there's less room for unhelpful bias to creep into the process that way. They're actually focusing on trying to surface data that is going to be predictive as to whether that person will perform in the role or not.

When that data does get surfaced, what does it look like? What kinds of factors are you evaluating?

It can look like many things, but I think one piece of data that I always spend a lot of time on is the skills and the competencies and the behaviors that need to show up. In sourcing, there are data signals that we might be looking for, but I think when it comes to assessing talent, there are ways to extract data from an interview process. Psychometric testing has definitely fallen out of vogue in recent times, but we have all of the tools we need and all of the science we need to actually make more predictive hiring decisions, using things like psychometric tests and strengths-based profilers and personality profilers.

They just seem to be not widely adopted and not very popular, partly because some of them are very academic and are inaccessible. Some of them have horrible UX, and some of them just add friction to the process. Most people like to believe they are a really good judge of talent and of character, so I think what I'm trying to challenge is that there is data and there is information that would help hiring decisions. You just have to make the conscious effort to go outside of yourself to go and seek it.

To somebody on the outside, pulling up a company page and seeing that the executive team is eight white men would seem to show pretty clearly that there's a need to bring someone like you in, but what other signals in the data are you paying attention to as you make assessments or identify issues?

This is one of the most common pitfalls I see in our portfolio and in early-stage, venture-backed companies generally. A lot of people tend to have a very narrow view on what leadership looks like and what executives look like, and I don't think that's helped by investors. There is a tendency to focus on signals that could be misleading, such as credentials — where they went to school, companies they worked for — and just taking that at face value and reading it as desirable. But that's done with no reason other than the fact that it's hard to get into Oxford.

What I try to get founders to focus on more is the type of personality that person has and trying to move beyond the confidence that's coming across in the interview to the actual competence. I always get founders to talk about what the objective is: If this person was doing their job really well, what would happen? And then let's reverse engineer that and say, what track record do they need to have, and what skills would they need to have to be able to do that?

By going through that exercise, you come up with this assessment scorecard, which is really specific and granular, but it means that when you have a candidate in the pipeline, you're not getting thrown by these other illustrious things on their CV. I've seen this have a positive effect on the diversity of the pipeline and the diversity of the hires.

The second thing is kind of simple, but I make sure that structured interviews are in place, as unstructured interviews are just the worst when trying to make predictive decisions. Even if you really love the person sitting in front of you, don't divert and go off and talk about what you do on the weekends, let's stick to these questions so we're doing a fair assessment.

As the interviews and conversations have moved largely online due to the pandemic, have there been any adjustments you've had to make to the scorecards? Are there new or changed factors that play into the evaluations?

To a large extent, it has stayed the same. In fact, I think these assessment guides have become even more important in this virtual world of hiring because there are things that you do miss and you can't pick up. Some of the more tacit things like body language and how they walked into the office, and how they greeted the receptionist, and all these sorts of things.

But I think it largely hasn't changed because you're always looking for the same set of things. You still want to make sure that the process is screening for what a person's done in the past and the skills they have and the competencies.

I would imagine some of the conversations you have around executive talent can be tough topics to broach with the founders, especially when you've identified an issue in their current processes. How do you approach them?

When I'm introduced to a founder, and they guess what my role might look like, I probably disappoint a lot because I think they expect me to serve candidates on the plate or jump straight to the sourcing and the interviewing. So I often say that if we're doing our jobs well as operating partners, we have to deliver messages that are tough, and they might not want to hear them in the short term. But as you start working with a founder, and especially after I've explained why this is so important and how it can go horribly wrong, they really come around and there's a high willingness to stick to a process that's more data driven.

Those issues of diversity, equity and inclusion and racial injustice have been under the microscope more so in the U.S. since the killing of George Floyd. You work with both American and internationally based companies; has there been a difference in the response you've seen to the approaches taken to corporate D&I conversations?

I've seen much higher engagement with the topic. I think there was a good level of interest before, but now it's really made people think more about things like implicit racism and actually look at their structures internally to evaluate what exists in our companies that is not promoting a diverse and inclusive and equitable culture and team.

I've had a lot of inbound requests for support from our portfolio on helping them revisit their performance evaluation structures with a diversity and inclusion lens. And part of that is seeing that even these companies that felt like they had meritocratic setups have a lot of subjectivity there.

Your goal is to inject data into the parts of business that are sometimes considered softer, so what's the dream data set that you don't have yet that would help that goal?

I would love to have a data set on people's personalities, their tendencies. There's so much to gain if you know what someone is strong at and what their performance risks might look like. In the recent months, I've become really interested in strengths profiles, which are tests that have psychometric properties but focus on telling you what your top seven strengths are and then what the downside of those strengths might be.

One of the things I did last year was work with an organizational psychologist to review the portfolio founders that we'd invested in the past, match that to their outcomes so far, and then look at the latest theory on leadership derailment and success. We came up with a framework around the six most-common founder derailing characteristics. We can now build a set of questions and a scorecard around that to use as a reminder as we go through and meet new teams.

We have an internal software that we're building called Motherbrain. It's currently used as a tool for our investment team to find companies that are not coming through their network. We're not there yet, but I would love it if there were some sort of data set in Motherbrain that would tell us about a person to watch who might be starting a company in the future.

Protocol | Workplace

The pay gap persists for Black women

"The pay gap is a multifaceted problem and any time you have a complex problem, there's not a single solution that's going to solve it."

For every dollar paid to white, non-Hispanic men, Black women are paid just 63 cents, according to the American Community Survey Census data.

Photo: Christine/Unsplash

Last year's racial reckoning following the murder of George Floyd led many tech companies to commit to promoting equity within their organizations, including working toward pay equity. But despite efforts, the wage gap for Black women still persists. For every dollar paid to white, non-Hispanic men, Black women are paid just 63 cents, according to the American Community Survey Census data.

Black Women's Equal Pay Day on Tuesday represents the estimated number of days into the year it would take for Black women to make what their white, non-Hispanic male counterparts made at the end of the previous year, according to the organization Equal Pay Today. And while the responsibility to fix the pay gap falls mostly on companies to rectify, some female employees have taken matters into their own hands and held companies to their asserted values by negotiating higher pay.

Keep Reading Show less
Amber Burton

Amber Burton (@amberbburton) is a reporter at Protocol. Previously, she covered personal finance and diversity in business at The Wall Street Journal. She earned an M.S. in Strategic Communications from Columbia University and B.A. in English and Journalism from Wake Forest University. She lives in North Carolina.

pay

What comes to mind when you think of AI? In the past, it might have been the Turing test, a sci-fi character or IBM's Deep Blue-defeating chess champion Garry Kasparov. Today, instead of copying human intelligence, we're seeing immense progress made in using AI to unobtrusively simplify and enrich our own intelligence and experiences. Natural language processing, modern encrypted security solutions, advanced perception and imaging capabilities, next-generation data management and logistics, and automotive assistance are some of the many ways AI is quietly yet unmistakably driving some of the latest advancements inside our phones, PCs, cars and other crucial 21st century devices. And the combination of 5G and AI is enabling a world with distributed intelligence where AI processing is happening on devices and in the cloud.

Keep Reading Show less
Alex Katouzian
Alex Katouzian currently serves as senior vice president and general manager of the Mobile, Compute and Infrastructure (MCI) Business Unit at Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. In this role, Katouzian is responsible for the profit, loss and strategy of the MCI BU, which includes business lines for Mobile Handset Products and Application Processor Technologies, 4G and 5G Mobile Broadband for embedded applications, Small and Macro Cells, Modem Technologies, Compute products across multiple OS’, eXtended Reality and AI Edge Cloud products.
Protocol | Workplace

Tech company hybrid work policies are becoming more flexible, not less

Twitter, LinkedIn and Asana are already changing their hybrid policies to allow for more flexibility.

Photo: FG Trade/Getty Images

Twitter, LinkedIn and Asana are all loosening up their strategies around hybrid work, allowing for more flexibility before even fully reopening their offices.

In the last week and a half, Twitter announced it's adopting an asynchronous-first approach, and both Asana and LinkedIn said they would increase the amount of time their employees can work remotely.

Keep Reading Show less
Allison Levitsky
Allison Levitsky is a reporter at Protocol covering workplace issues in tech. She previously covered big tech companies and the tech workforce for the Silicon Valley Business Journal. Allison grew up in the Bay Area and graduated from UC Berkeley.
Power

Activision Blizzard scrambles to repair its toxic image

Blizzard President J. Allen Brack is the first executive to depart amid the sexual harassment crisis.

Activision Blizzard doesn't seem committed to lasting change.

Photo: Allen J. Schaben/Getty Images

As Activision Blizzard's workplace crisis rages on into its third week, the company is taking measures to try to calm the storm — to little avail. On Tuesday, Blizzard President J. Allen Brack, who took the reins at the developer responsible for World of Warcraft back in 2018, resigned. He's to be replaced by executives Jen Oneal and Mike Ybarra, who will co-lead the studio in a power-sharing agreement some believe further solidifies CEO Bobby Kotick's control over the subsidiary.

Nowhere in Blizzard's statement about Brack's departure does it mention California's explosive sexual harassment and discrimination lawsuit at the heart of the saga. The lawsuit, filed last month, resulted last week in a 500-person walkout at Blizzard's headquarters in Irvine. (Among the attendees was none other than Ybarra, the new studio co-head.)

Keep Reading Show less
Nick Statt
Nick Statt is Protocol's video game reporter. Prior to joining Protocol, he was news editor at The Verge covering the gaming industry, mobile apps and antitrust out of San Francisco, in addition to managing coverage of Silicon Valley tech giants and startups. He now resides in Rochester, New York, home of the garbage plate and, completely coincidentally, the World Video Game Hall of Fame. He can be reached at nstatt@protocol.com.
Protocol | Workplace

Alabama Amazon workers will likely get a second union vote

An NLRB judge said that Amazon "usurped" the NLRB by pushing for a mailbox to be installed in front of its facility, and also that the company violated laws that protect workers from monitoring of their behavior during union elections.

An NLRB judge ruled that Amazon has violated union election rules

Image: Amazon

Bessemer, Alabama warehouse workers will likely get a second union vote because of Amazon's efforts to have a USPS ballot box installed just outside of the Bessemer warehouse facility during the mail-in vote, as well as other violations of union vote rules, according to an NLRB ruling published Tuesday morning.

While union organizers, represented by the Retail, Wholesale, and Department Store Union, lost the first vote by more than a 2:1 margin, a second election will be scheduled and held unless Amazon successfully appeals the ruling. Though Amazon is the country's second-largest private employer, no unionization effort at the company has ever been successful.

Keep Reading Show less
Anna Kramer

Anna Kramer is a reporter at Protocol (Twitter: @ anna_c_kramer, email: akramer@protocol.com), where she writes about labor and workplace issues. Prior to joining the team, she covered tech and small business for the San Francisco Chronicle and privacy for Bloomberg Law. She is a recent graduate of Brown University, where she studied International Relations and Arabic and wrote her senior thesis about surveillance tools and technological development in the Middle East.

Latest Stories