The most effective hiring decisions balance what someone has done with what they are capable of doing next.
Rethinking what we measure in hiring
For years, experience has been the default benchmark in hiring — and for good reason. It offers valuable evidence of skills, exposure, and results. Yet many organisations have seen strong CVs fail to translate into strong performance. In fast-changing roles, experience on its own is no longer a reliable predictor of future success.
Experience shows where someone has been. Potential indicates how they are likely to grow.
The goal is not to replace one with the other, but to assess both with equal rigour.
1. Designing Interviews to Reveal Potential
Many interviews still focus heavily on past roles and responsibilities. To understand potential, the structure needs to evolve.
Shift from validation to exploration:
Introduce consistency
Use structured interviews with defined competencies and simple scorecards to improve fairness and decision quality.
Use situational questions
Move beyond past examples:
“How would you approach a problem you’ve not encountered before?”
“What would you do with limited information?”
These reveal thinking, not just experience.
For example, two professionals with similar backgrounds may approach an unfamiliar problem very differently in terms of structure, clarity, and adaptability.
Incorporate practical exercises
Short, role-relevant tasks help assess problem-solving, learning ability, and how professionals handle ambiguity.
Split assessment across interviewers
Different perspectives reduce individual bias and improve overall accuracy.
Even small changes such as consistent questioning can significantly improve outcomes.
2. Identifying Signals of Potential
Potential appears through patterns of behaviour, although it may present differently across individuals. Key signals include:
Learning agility
Understands new concepts quickly
Makes connections across different areas
Problem-solving ability
Breaks issues into manageable steps
Clarifies before responding
Communication skills
Conveys ideas with sufficient clarity for the context
Adapts communication based on the audience or situation
Engages in dialogue rather than delivering rehearsed responses
Growth mindset
Reflects on challenges and what changed afterwards
Demonstrates self-awareness
Curiosity
Shows interest through questions or thoughtful reflection
Ownership
Understands individual contribution while recognising team impact
Strong professionals do not just give answers, they show how they think. Look less for polished responses, and more for how professionals adjust their thinking when challenged or given new information. Avoid equating communication style with capability. Clear thinking can exist even if articulation varies.
3. Reducing Bias While Improving Accuracy
Assessing potential introduces subjectivity, which can increase bias if not managed carefully.
Common pitfalls:
Overvaluing well-known employers
Favouring similar backgrounds
Mistaking confidence for capability
Practical ways to improve fairness:
Define criteria upfront: Align on what “potential” means (e.g. adaptability, learning speed, problem-solving)
Ask for evidence: Base feedback on specific examples rather than impressions
Separate substance from style: Do not disadvantage professionals based on communication differences
Be mindful of process bias: Some formats favour professionals with prior exposure. Clear guidance helps level the field
Use multiple perspectives: Diverse interview panels reduce blind spots
Separate evidence from decision-making where possible: This helps avoid early consensus shaping the outcome
Structure does not remove judgement, instead it strengthens it.
Rather than relying on instinct, assess a few key dimensions:
Problem-solving
Learning speed
Adaptability
Ownership
Curiosity
Communication clarity
This is not a checklist for perfection, but a way to identify consistent strengths across areas.
Final thought
The most effective hiring decisions are not based solely on past performance, or solely on perceived potential. They combine both.
The real question is not only “What has this person done?” but
“How are they likely to grow in a role that may not look the same in two years’ time?”
In a changing environment, this balance leads to stronger and more resilient hiring outcomes.