Blogs

Hiring the right person for the right position in a veterinary practice is tough, particularly because of the tight job market most practices are facing for all positions—doctors, technicians, assistants, receptionists, kennel workers, and others.

All practices conduct interviews of one kind or another, but some practices use additional kinds of tools and resources in assessing the quality of candidates. VHMA’s January 2020 management survey explores this topic.

Fifty percent of respondents indicated that they use a job-knowledge test as part of their hiring process, and 40% indicated a skills assessment test. Designing, selecting, and using pre-employment tests is not a simple task, and practices need to make sure that any tests used are valid, reliable, give consistent results and aren’t in violation of state or federal regulations. Testing needs to be non-discriminatory and the results need to be genuinely predictive of employment success. A good article outlining some of the issues can be found here:  https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/toolkits/pages/screeningbymeansofpreemploymenttesting.aspx

When asked about criminal background checks, 42% of respondents said it is a part of their hiring process. Thirty-seven percent of respondents require a drug screen, 5% require a driving record check, and only 3% require a credit check. As with testing, background checks must be accurate, related to job performance, and administered in a non-discriminatory manner. Make sure you know what the law is in your state.

An online search of the candidate is very easy to perform, and it’s not surprising to find that 55% of respondents do perform a Google search as part of their hiring practice. Online searches can definitely allow the employer to confirm information shared by the candidate and gather other information not previously known. However, as with testing and background checks, Internet searches have some risks for the employer doing the search. For example, a Facebook search may reveal information that legally cannot be used in employment decision making (the candidate's age, religion or ethnic background) and it is harder for an employer who has this information to prove they didn’t consider it than if they never knew it in the first place. Make sure you know what the law is in your state and how to mitigate some of the risks of this kind of information gathering.

The vast majority of respondents, 86%, said their practice verifies a candidate’s education, licensing, and credentials as part of the hiring process. Reference checking can be a mixed bag. When the employer can get enough unbiased and useful information to contribute to the hiring decision, it’s worth the time and effort. Sometimes, however, it seems that very little useful information can be gathered, and employers may just decide it’s a waste of time. However, not checking references can also be problematic if a serious problem develops with someone you hire and you would have been forewarned had you checked references. Again, make sure you know what the law is in your state regarding reference checking and how to mitigate any risks of doing so. Some respondents mentioned the use of automated reference checking software to help with the efficiency of this exercise. Ninety-six percent of respondents said they check with previous employers.

All practices conduct some kind of interview with likely job candidates; the vast majority of respondents (88%) do some kind of working interview, although what the candidates actually do during their interview varies. Over 1/2 of the respondents said they only do observational interviews during which the candidate doesn’t actually perform work in the practice. About 1/3 said the candidates actually do perform work for the practice, and about 40% said candidates demonstrated their skills during this time but not as part of the actual daily workflow (for example, the candidate was asked to place a catheter in an employee’s dog.) Very few practices, 14%, require a signed confidentiality/non-disclosure agreement from a candidate as part of the working interview.

Most employers consider spending more time with a candidate in a working interview to be time well spent. However, the interview must be structured in such a way that the practice actually gets useful information and doesn’t violate state and federal law. The employees spending time with the candidate need to be educated about the topics to be avoided in conversation, the questions that can’t be asked, and the type of tasks the candidate can do. Make sure your candidates are appropriately covered by workers' compensation insurance and that if they are actually “working” vs. “observing” that they are paid as required by state and federal law.

When asked to share other employment screening tools the practice has used and found to be useful respondents indicated:

• Phone screen interviews to weed out applicants that are clearly not suitable
• Automated phone interviews
• Feedback from employees involved in the working interview
• Use of behavioral interview questions
• Panel interviews

Read the full report, VHMA Insiders’ Insight – January 2020.