Good on Paper Isn't Good Enough

Why Traditional Interviews Fall Short

Claire Monroe: Hey everyone—welcome back to The Science of Leading. I’m Claire Monroe, and as always, I’m here with Edwin Carrington.So... I’ve been thinking about something we kinda touched on a few episodes ago—how interviews can feel, I dunno, just super generic.Like, you ask someone about their background, maybe their skills, and you get these... polished answers. Totally rehearsed.But is that actually useful? I mean—is it even telling us what we really need to know?

Edwin Carrington: That’s a great question, Claire. And you’re not wrong—most interviews stick to what’s on someone’s CV.You get the what they’ve done part, sure. But not the how they’ll actually show up when things get tough—or how well they’ll fit into your team’s rhythm.I’ve seen it again and again: someone looks great on paper... but a few months in, things start to unravel.And more often than not, it’s not about their skills.It’s about how they think, how they behave—and whether their values actually sync with yours.

Claire Monroe: Yeah—and the cost of getting that wrong? Ugh, it’s huge.I think I read—maybe it was SHRM?—that hiring someone who’s a bad cultural fit can cost, like, 60% of their salary.And that’s not even counting the morale hit or how it slows everyone else down. It’s... kinda wild.

Edwin Carrington: That’s exactly right. And I’ll tell you, early in my career, I made that mistake myself. I remember hiring a brilliant analyst—top of her class, technically sharp. But within weeks, it was clear she struggled with our team’s fast-paced, collaborative style. She preferred to work alone, needed a lot of structure, and, well, our environment was anything but structured. The tension started to build, and eventually, she left. The team was frustrated, she was unhappy, and we lost months of momentum. It taught me that technical skills are just the starting point. If you don’t dig deeper, you’re flying blind.

Claire Monroe: Yeah—and when you get that wrong? Oof. It’s expensive.I think I read somewhere—maybe SHRM?—that hiring someone who’s a bad cultural fit can cost, like, 60% of their salary. And that’s not even counting the morale hit or how it slows everyone else down. It’s... kinda wild.

Edwin Carrington: That’s spot on.And I’ve been there—early in my career, I hired this analyst who looked perfect on paper. Top of her class, brilliant with the numbers...But she needed a ton of structure, preferred working solo—and our team? Total opposite. Fast, collaborative, messy.Tension built fast. She left, the team was frustrated, and we lost real momentum.That whole situation taught me something: technical skills? Just the starting line.If you don’t dig deeper, you’re basically flying blind.

The Power of Behavioral Questions

Claire Monroe: Totally. And I think a lot of leaders still—like—underestimate how much that kind of mismatch affects the whole group.It’s never just one person—it’s the entire team dynamic that gets shaken.

Edwin Carrington: Exactly.A bad fit doesn’t just cost money—it chips away at trust, burns energy... and sometimes even drives your best people away.That’s why, like we’ve said before, you can’t just rely on gut instinct or a checklist.You’ve gotta go deeper. Ask: How do they handle setbacks? What drives them? Do their values line up with ours?

Claire Monroe: Okay—so... let’s talk about that.Like, how do you actually do it?We’ve talked a lot about behavioral questions on this show, but honestly? I still feel like there’s a gap between knowing you should ask them... and knowing which ones actually work.What are the kinds of questions that really get to the heart of who someone is?

Edwin Carrington: Great place to start.The best behavioral questions ask for real, specific examples—like:“What’s the hardest decision you’ve had to make in the past six months?”Or: “Tell me about a time you missed a goal. What did you take away from it?”These aren’t just about what happened—they show how someone thinks under pressure... whether they reflect, whether they own their mistakes.You’re looking for accountability. Self-awareness. And alignment with the values your team actually lives.

Claire Monroe: Oof—yes.There’s also that question: “What role do you naturally take on in a team?” I love that one.’Cause it’s not about a right answer—it’s about alignment.Like, if your team’s super collaborative, and someone’s wired to work solo...They might be brilliant, but still struggle.

Edwin Carrington: Exactly.And this is where the conversation’s evolving.We’re moving from hiring for “culture fit” to hiring for “culture add.”It’s not about finding someone who’s just like everyone else—it’s about finding people who bring something new to the table.Fresh perspectives. Different thinking styles. That’s where innovation starts.Stick to sameness—and you risk groupthink and blind spots.

Claire Monroe: That totally tracks.I’m thinking back to the first time I was on a hiring panel...I was so focused on whether someone would “fit in,” you know?Looking back, I probably missed out on people who could’ve actually helped us grow.If I’d had questions like, “How do you prioritize when everything’s urgent?” or “Tell me about a time you went above and beyond,”I think I would’ve seen the real person—not just the résumé.

Science Meets Hiring: Tools for Better Decisions

Claire Monroe: Okay, so—we’ve talked about the questions.But what about the tools?I know a lot of companies are using assessments now—like, the OAD Behavioral Assessment.How does that actually work in practice?Is it really that much better than just... trusting your gut?

Edwin Carrington: That’s a fair question.Behavioral science has come a long way—and tools like OAD are designed to bring clarity where gut instinct alone falls short.Instead of just guessing, you get actual data. Things like: how someone handles ambiguity, whether they prefer autonomy or structure, how they respond to feedback...It’s not about replacing interviews—it’s about adding depth.For example, OAD uses psychometrics to map a candidate’s traits to your real-world work environment.Are they energized by independence? Do they need consistency? That kind of clarity helps you hire with confidence.

Claire Monroe: So, it’s like... you’re looking for alignment between what someone says in the interview—and how they’re actually wired?And if that doesn’t line up... that’s kind of a red flag?

Edwin Carrington: Exactly.You want that consistency—between their answers, their energy, and what your team actually needs.And tools like OAD help you spot that.One company I worked with? They realized they’d been hiring for “fit” for years... and ended up with a team that all thought the same way.Once they started using behavioral assessments, they brought in people with totally different strengths.Some challenged the status quo, others brought fresh energy... and suddenly, the team was more innovative, more collaborative—and way more resilient.

Claire Monroe: That’s so cool.And it really ties back to what we said earlier—about “culture add” over “culture fit.”Like... bringing in people who stretch your team in a good way instead of just keeping things comfortable.So yeah—don’t just go with your gut.Use the science, ask better questions, and look for that deeper alignment.

Edwin Carrington: Well said, Claire.You can teach skills.But values alignment? Behavioral fit?That’s what builds teams that last.And with the right tools, you can make those calls with a lot more clarity.

Claire Monroe: Alright—that’s a wrap for today’s episode.If you wanna see how tools like OAD work in action, head over to OAD.ai and try it for free today.Seriously—it’s eye-opening.

Edwin Carrington: Thanks, Claire.Always a pleasure.And thanks to everyone listening—keep asking the right questions.We’ll see you next time on The Science of Leading.

Claire Monroe: Bye!