Author: Karen van den Bergh
Editor’s note: try our phenomenal new recruitment and onboarding app and save 90% on your recruitment. Try a demo free today.
For many years, hiring decisions have been driven primarily by qualifications, experience, and technical capability. While these factors remain important, a key variable is often overlooked – whether the individual is actually suited to the manager they will report to. Increasingly, organisations are discovering that hiring the most qualified candidate does not guarantee success. In fact, when there is a mismatch in personality, behavioural style, or working approach between an employee and their manager, even highly skilled individuals can struggle to perform, integrate, or remain in the role long term.
Research from organisations such as Gallup consistently shows that managers have a disproportionate impact on employee engagement, performance, and retention. A commonly cited finding is that a significant number of employees leave roles not because of the job itself, but because of their direct manager. This highlights a critical gap in traditional recruitment approaches. Businesses spend considerable time defining the technical requirements of a role, yet very little time considering the working style, expectations, and behavioural traits of the person leading that role.
The consequences of this oversight are often subtle at first but become increasingly damaging over time. Misalignment can lead to communication breakdowns, frustration, and incorrect assumptions about performance. A manager may perceive an employee as slow or disengaged, while the employee may feel unsupported or micromanaged. In reality, both individuals may be competent and well-intentioned, but fundamentally incompatible in how they operate. In more severe cases, this mismatch can negatively affect an employee’s confidence and career trajectory, labelling them as underperforming when they are simply in the wrong environment.
One of the core issues is that while technical skills can be taught, behavioural traits and personality tendencies are far more ingrained. An employee can be trained on systems, processes, and industry knowledge, but it is far more difficult to change how they communicate, how they handle pressure, or how they prefer to work. This is why forward-thinking organisations are shifting their focus toward behavioural alignment, rather than purely technical fit.
A crucial starting point in this process is self-awareness at the management level. Hiring managers and team leaders need to clearly understand their own working style before they can identify what type of individual will succeed under them. This includes reflecting on questions such as:
- Do I prefer direct and fast-paced communication, or a more considered and collaborative approach?
- Do I expect employees to work independently, or do I provide close guidance and structure?
- How do I respond under pressure, and what do I expect from others in high-stress situations?
Without this level of clarity, recruiters and HR teams are left to make assumptions, which often results in mismatched hires.
Psychometric tools can play a valuable role in formalising this self-awareness. Assessments such as the DISC Assessment provide a structured way to evaluate behavioural tendencies across dimensions such as dominance, influence, steadiness, and conscientiousness. By profiling the hiring manager, organisations can begin to build a clear picture of what complementary traits are required in a candidate. For example, a highly dominant and results-driven manager may benefit from someone who brings structure and attention to detail, rather than another equally dominant personality that could create conflict. Similarly, a highly methodical and process-driven manager may struggle with an employee who prefers flexibility and rapid decision-making.
When this insight is properly integrated into the recruitment process, it begins to influence not only who is hired, but how roles are defined and evaluated. Job descriptions become more realistic, reflecting the actual working environment rather than an idealised version of the role. Interviews become more insightful, moving beyond technical questioning into an exploration of how a candidate thinks, communicates, and responds to real-world situations.
To support this, interviewers should incorporate questions that reveal behavioural tendencies and self-awareness. Instead of asking only about experience, they should explore how candidates operate in practice. For example, asking a candidate to describe the type of manager they work best with can provide immediate insight into their preferences and expectations. Questions such as: “Tell me about a time you worked under pressure – how did you handle it and what support did you need?” can uncover both coping mechanisms and dependency levels. Similarly: “Do you prefer clear structure and defined processes, or do you thrive in more flexible environments?” helps identify alignment with the manager’s style.
It is also useful to probe communication and feedback preferences. Asking: “How do you prefer to receive feedback?” or: “Can you give an example of a time you disagreed with your manager and how you handled it?” can reveal emotional intelligence, resilience, and communication style. Another effective question is: “What frustrates you most in a work environment?” which often exposes underlying behavioural drivers and potential points of conflict. These types of questions move the conversation beyond capability and into compatibility, which is where long-term success is determined.
Real-world examples illustrate the importance of this approach. Consider a scenario where a highly analytical and detail-oriented individual is placed under an entrepreneurial, fast-moving manager who prioritises speed over precision. Despite strong technical ability, the employee may feel overwhelmed and unsupported, while the manager may become frustrated by what they perceive as a lack of urgency. In contrast, when organisations take the time to align behavioural styles, the outcomes are markedly different. Employees integrate more quickly, communication flows more naturally, and performance improves without the need for excessive intervention.
Ultimately, the goal of recruitment should not be to find the best candidate on paper, but to find the right individual for a specific environment. When organisations begin to view hiring as a process of alignment – between role, manager, and individual – they reduce risk, improve retention, and create conditions where both employees and managers can perform at their best. Ignoring this dynamic does not just lead to poor hires; it leads to lost potential, unnecessary turnover, and avoidable frustration on all sides.
The shift required is not complex, but it does require intentionality. By combining self-awareness, structured behavioural assessment, and more thoughtful interviewing techniques, businesses can move from reactive hiring to strategic talent placement. In doing so, they not only improve outcomes for the organisation, but also ensure that individuals are placed in environments where they have the best possible chance to succeed.
At HRTorque, we specialise in bespoke HR solutions for the benefit of you and your team. Email us on [email protected] for more information.