I distinctly remember two candidates. Both had essentially the same qualifications. Both were young men. One was clearly relaxed, comfortable, social with the other candidates and didn’t appeared to be worried about the outcome. The other was very focused, prepared, asked pointed questions of the interviewers and appeared to take the opportunity very seriously.

My recommendation was to select the second young man. I think I scored the first as just so-so. Both were hired. It was evident from the get-go that the first was a solid fit. He worked well with his team, had high energy, was adaptable and delivered solid results. The second (my favorite candidate) had a deer-in-the-headlights look from day one. He was a poor fit and didn’t last long.

How could I have been so wrong?

The problem wasn’t with the candidates or the process. It was with me. I let my unknown biases creep into the interview process and prevent my judgment from remaining objective.

If you’re in a position where you need to hire someone, consider these common interview biases (not a comprehensive list) and hopefully you’ll avoid the same mistakes I made.

Similar-to-Me

This common bias gives preference to a candidate with similar qualities as the interviewer. I just recently saw a razor commercial that featured a candidate with a shaved head receiving preference in to interview with a bald hiring manager. That’s a classic case. In my situation, I assumed that just because one candidate was more intense than the rest (like I can tend to be), he was more qualified. In many cases, it isn’t true.

Halo Effect (or Horn Effect)

This bias takes place when an interviewer rates a candidate highly based on a single characteristic or performance outcome (or poorly with the Horn Effect). In actuality, a single instance is a poor measure of overall ability. (This holds true for performance evaluations as well).

Contrast

This bias takes place when an interviewer compares all candidates to each other – or to a single candidate – instead of to the role requirements. I made this mistake by comparing the two candidates in my story with each other instead of with the requirements of the role. Instead, compare candidates to the requirements and then see who comes out on top.

Nonverbal

This bias places extra emphasis on body language. Body language is important. It may well be a deciding factor between two equally qualified candidates. But body language alone doesn’t determine whether a candidate meets the requirements of a role.

Negative (or Positive) Emphasis

This bias takes place when an interviewer allows a small amount of negative information to outweigh positive information (or for Positive Emphasis – allows positive information to outweigh significant negative information).

Question Inconsistency

Question inconsistency is just that – asking different questions to each candidate. That’s why it is important to use an interview guide, or to at least record your questions so you can ask the same to each person.

Recency

With this bias, the interviewer recalls the most recently interviewed candidates the most clearly, and therefore rates them higher. This is why it’s so important to document your notes immediately after an interview takes place.

Knowledge-of-Predictor

This bias occurs when an interviewer is aware that a candidate scored high (or low) on an assessment test for the role in question. Assessment tests have their place, but an interviewer shouldn’t see the assessment results until after the interview (if possible) in order to stay objective.

This isn’t the entire list. There are plenty more: central tendency, cultural noise, leniency and others. But it’s enough to start with. Bias hurts, as in my story. And in virtually every case, it’s much easier to hire right than to correct a hiring mistake.

Have you let one of these biases impact a hiring decision? How did it turn out?

Nathan Magnuson is a leadership consultant, coach, trainer and thought leader.  Receive his ebook Trusted Leadership Advisor by subscribing to his website or   follow him on Twitter.

Sitting in on an interview might have been awkward for that role, but since then I’ve participated in many job interviews, observed the process and helped identify skills needed for future job roles. Talent acquisition can get complicated sometimes, but I constantly find myself referring back to three simple questions my friend Brad once shared with me about how to determine if a candidate is a good fit for the team. I’d like to share them with you.

Would this person be a positive influence on my team? On my kids?

A person may have all the technical and leadership skills required to get a job done. But at the end of the day, we all become like the company we keep. If a person’s influence is less than positive, it will bring the entire team down. An extreme way to think about this is to consider if you’d feel comfortable having you children spend time around the individual. If that doesn’t seem like a good idea, perhaps you ought to reconsider offering the candidate a chance to significantly influence your employees.

What has this person done? Does it match their stated values?

Most positions require a resume as a part of the job application. It’s certainly important that the actual experiences matches what you find on the application. But it’s also important to demonstrate a values match. If a candidate says he is a very loyal employee but has held five jobs in the last two years, that should set off some alarm bells. Or perhaps he talks about how important customer service is but then complains about the customers of a previous company. Would you expect him to feel any differently about your customers?

What is this person’s motivation to be part of this team?

This is a pretty straight forward question. Why is the person applying? Does she want to be a part of the team or does she have her sights set beyond this particular role to another one? Will it be a resume builder or a developmental experience? Of course no one will (or should) stay in the same role for the rest of their career. But if this job is not the one the candidate wants, wouldn’t you want to know why she is applying to this one instead of to another one? Chances are, she will not be as invested as a person who truly wants to be there.

None of these questions ought to replace typical questions regarding competency. But skills being equal (or in some cases, not being so equal), isn’t it worth going the extra mile to find the “right person?”

What other criteria do you use to identify the right person for a new job?

Nathan Magnuson is a leadership consultant, coach, trainer and thought leader.  Receive his new ebook Trusted Leadership Advisor by subscribing to his website  or follow him on Twitter.