The Role of ‘Gut Feel’ in Hiring: What our network told us
“I can’t quite explain it… but something just clicked. It felt right”
It’s something we hear fairly often when a client reflects on why they chose one candidate over another.
On paper the candidates may have looked similar. They were all capable of performing in the role. Competencies scored. Experience matched. Interview answers were solid.
But somewhere in the process there was a moment where something simply felt right.
That elusive factor is often described as “gut feel.”
Gut feel is generally defined as an intuitive or emotional reaction to a situation, rather than a decision based purely on rational thought or evidence.
But in an increasingly structured and data-driven hiring environment, how much space should intuition really have when deciding who joins your HR team?
Recently we ran a LinkedIn poll to ask our HR network exactly that – “When deciding who to hire into your HR team, how much do you rely on gut feel?”
What We Were Told
The results were interesting:
- 83% – Assessment & Gut Feel
- 12% – Gut Feel All the Way
- 6% – A Robust Assessment Only
So while robust assessment clearly matters, the overwhelming majority acknowledged that intuition still plays a role in the final decision. Very few people rely purely on data alone. And perhaps that isn’t surprising.
Why Gut Feel Still Exists in Hiring
Hiring decisions aren’t made in a vacuum. They’re influenced by context, team dynamics, and organisational culture, things that don’t always fit neatly into a competency scorecard.
Hiring managers often draw on years of experience:
- Have they seen someone succeed with this profile before?
- How will this person land with the leadership team?
- Do they demonstrate credibility in a way that will influence stakeholders?
These judgments often happen quickly, and sometimes subconsciously.
What we call “gut feel” is often experience processing information faster than conscious analysis.
But There’s a Balance
Where things become problematic is when gut feel becomes the only decision-making tool. Without some structure around the process, instinct can easily drift into bias.
That’s why many HR teams aim to create processes that combine both elements:
- Clear role requirements
- Consistent interview questions
- Structured scoring or competency frameworks
- Multiple interviewers offering different perspectives
And then once the evidence is gathered allowing space for the human element.
After all, HR hiring decisions are rarely purely technical. They’re about how someone will operate, influence and build relationships within a business.
What We See From the Recruitment Side
As HR recruiters, we’re often in the unique position of hearing the reflections after the decision has been made. Clients will talk through the technical strengths of the candidate they chose. But almost inevitably the explanation includes something like:
“They just felt like the right fit for the team.”
Interestingly, that instinct is often strongest when the process has been thorough.
Once the evidence is clear, gut feel becomes the final sense check.
The Sweet Spot
The poll results suggest most HR professionals already recognise this balance.
Assessment provides the structure. Experience provides the interpretation.
One without the other can lead to poor decisions. Together, they usually lead to stronger ones.
At HRLife, we see this combination play out every day when helping organisations hire into their HR teams. The technical capability always matters but so does the ability to build trust, influence stakeholders and operate within the culture of the business.
If you’re currently thinking about hiring into your HR team and would like to talk through the market or how to structure a process that works well for both clients and candidates, we are always happy to have a conversation.