Hiring is a process that creates too much risk. It needs abold makeover. As practiced by most companies, hiring isillogical. We are encouraged to evaluate a candidate'sfitness for duty with no real data. Why is it considerednormal to make a hasty decision about a long-term commitment? That's not merely illogical, it's stupid. It is easy to hiresomeone and radically difficult to fire someone. Nonetheless,we hire as if we're afraid to truly know and test the person.

For the large, financially healthy, and smart companies (that'sa small group) there are answers to this conundrum. They uselonger interviewing processes, extensive testing, and finely tunedassessment centers combined with real applied work to evaluatepotential new hires. This substantially increases the oddsthey will find good talent that will mesh with the organization'sculture. Very cool – and ridiculously expensive.

So what's the answer for the rest of us? Consider thesefive bold ideas that decrease the risk of hiring by increasing theodds that the person will make a lasting contribution to theorganization.

First, stop pushing out a bunch of bull and start usingrealistic job previews. Think brutal honestly. You wantpeople to begin with their eyes wide open. My favoriteexample was from an internship I found as an MBA student. Iwas interviewing with the president of a small software firm. He was refreshingly blunt about life at the firm. He endedthe meeting with a tour, and started with the bathroom. I wasnervous as I followed him through the door of the men's room. He turned to me and said, “Son, look around. The floors aredirty and the urinals stink. Are you sure you want to workhere?” His description was accurate, and it was an awesomeplace to work. Learn the remaining switchandshift.comtips.