Hiring employees with the required skills and experience to bring to the role is entirely different to expecting employees to hit the ground running and produce the best they are capable of without an appropriate level of support. The problem with employing somebody to hit the ground running, is what you are asking for, is a robot to achieve a required outcome. Robots will do what you tell them to, the way that they have been programmed but they will do no more. They won't think outside the box, they don't create innovative solutions, there's no questioning, there's no thought for continuous improvement. Therefore expecting employees to hit the ground running is to your detriment.
This may seem somewhat of a rant and for that I am sorry, but it amuses me that managers think that all their problems will be solved at the point of hire. No recruitment process is flawless. We are dealing with flawed humans who are required to decide based on limited information, and far too often I have seen the “hit the ground running” paradigm fall short. If you cannot invest in the new starter you cannot afford the new starter. If you have little to invest, their return will be the limited return of a substandard employee.
The commonly held belief is that the investment required is an oppressive amount of time which needs to be carved out of your tight schedule. However, the truth is that if you have the right systems, level of organisation and energy to invest the actual time will be minimal and the returns maximal. One is five millennials do not pass their probation period and employees whose companies have longer onboarding programs gain full proficiency 34% faster than those in the shortest programs.
It is all about synchronicity. Synchronising the new starter with your expectations. Synchronising them with the team. Synchronising their skills with the role. Synchronising their efforts with what experience shows the areas of focus should be. Sure, you will need to find some time but that can be achieved through delegation in a lot of instances and as the first 3 months passes the amount of work the new starter can burden increases, freeing up your time. When you invest in the first three months you are providing support to set everyone up for success. At the end of the three months you will know with clarity if it has been the right hire and can make a confident decision at the end of the probation period.
Not all new starters are successful in the role, but it should not be looked upon as a failure. It was a successful process if it has provided the clarity to confidently decide if they are right for the job. Decide if the new starter can now hit the ground running armed with all they have learned in the first three months.