I want to move away from Lean discussions for this posting to talk about leadership. Specifically, I want to discuss hiring and promotions. As leaders, to a degree, we’re all faced with a roll of the dice when it comes to hiring or promoting someone. Will the person succeed or not? I can head in several directions with this topic, but consistent with 8020 & 6-Sigma, I like to get down to a significant few determinants for success. Before I get into what I use to assess candidates, let’s talk about some basics.
Basics: First, have you established a job spec that provides clarity on your desired qualifications & your goals for this position? Everything else in this discussion relies on this first step, so it deserves your time & attention.
In addition to assessing a candidate’s alignment with your spec, keep in mind that because someone is a great individual contributor doesn’t mean they’ll be good at supervision or leadership. Remember, almost every business needs a solid bench of “A” level individual contributors to succeed over time. I’m interested in knowing if the individual has displayed initiative to recognize and solve problems on their own. Do their peers seek them out for advice? Are they already respected as informal leaders? Are they leaders in their communities?
Second, let’s talk briefly about “A”, “B”, & “C” players. I think we’ve all been challenged to identify who’s who on our bench at some point. There’s an expectation you will have a normally distributed histogram. Usually, these ratings drive rewards, promotions, and future employment. In general, I agree with the underlying idea behind this thinking.
Some organizations apply this approach universally. Future leaders are “A” players, while individual contributors can only be strong “B” members. Since “A” level individual contributors are equally important to a company’s success, I prefer a tiered ABC approach. I like to see one tier for individual contributors & one for managers/leaders.
I have heard many definitions for each level over the years. The ones I liked the best came from Nish Teshoian, a key executive at Coltec Industries while I was there. He suggested that “A” players represented your ‘go-to’ folks on the bench. You knew that no matter what you asked them to take care of, you could move forward without having to circle back. Their work was so good, you rarely felt the need to review it. His definition for “C” players was equally straightforward.
As a leader, any time you found yourself dropping down a few levels to take care of something because you couldn’t trust someone’s work, you were dealing with a “C” player. He felt that you should waste no more dealing with them. “B” players were the most complex class. Solid “B” or “B+” folks provide teams with reliable execution of day-to-day needs. They may be consummate pros in their fields with no desire to get into leadership or to come up with the next great idea. However, in many ways they are the backbone of a company.
So, if you are impressed with a “B” or “A” player, should you promote them into bigger, more responsible roles? I use a “3-pronged fork” to consider a candidate. Each of the 3 tines represent a specific value.
My 3-Pronged Fork: Of all the variables you must consider, I have found 3 that are highly predictive of success – Vision, Heart, & Knowledge. Let’s talk about each one individually.
Vision – When I ask people the question, “If you could choose anything to do in life that would make you incredibly happy 2-5 years down the road, what would that be?” In 90% of the cases, I get no immediate answer. They have no clarity on what constitutes success or happiness. Even when I come back to them a few weeks later, they still have not established a clear picture on what that destination is or looks like. At the risk of asking the obvious, how do you start a journey with no clarity on destination? I’ve come to believe that a lot of people are so caught up in their daily challenges, they rarely go to the balcony & look at the path they’re on by default. Almost like a rudderless ship that will wash up on some shore some day provided they don’t capsize.
Even if you think the destination will likely evolve or change, pick one! The knowledge & experience you gain will pay forward in some way even if your path changes significantly.
From a selection point-of-view, moving forward with a candidate who is weak in this area, will likely be a disappointing choice down the road.
Heart – I want to know two things related to this second tine. Why do you want to pursue this destination & what have you done on your own to prepare/pursue this goal? In my experience, the more significant the “Why” is, the more folks will have invested personal time & effort towards their goals. I have found that when people are strong in the 1st tine related to clarity; they usually have a good sense of “Why” they want to pursue a goal. If this is weak, then the personal effort they invest tends to also be weak.
If you’re not excited about pursuing the destination you picked enough to really go for it, you may want to reconsider the goal you picked. The amount of Heart you have starting your journey is critical to sustaining your commitment over time & through challenges.
As to selection, demonstrated Heart is a very good determinant for success. I look for anecdotal examples of what the candidate has done on their own initiative versus what they are saying to me.
Knowledge – Some of the most disappointing choices I have witnessed involved people with incredible pedigrees & training related to the position in question. If you are weak in the 1st two tines, pedigree alone will only get you so far. Spend some time on the 1st tine to fix that happy place in your mind. Then the “Why” gets straightforward & the decision to invest time & effort becomes more exciting & less of a chore. If you’re a bit weak in this tine, but strong in the 1st two, I have seen a lot of folks succeed very well. They’ll find a way to fill in the blanks!
On selection, I know you must filter candidates somehow particularly when you’re looking at a large stack of resumes. You may want to make sure your job spec clearly defines demonstrated capabilities & clarity on what your expectations are for the role over the 1st year. Rather than try to connect the dots between a CV & your goals for the position, why not ask them to directly respond? How will they help you succeed? My 1st two questions would be tied to tines 1 & 2 & then I would want to see their responses to the specifics. Again, if you find the candidate strong in the 1st two tines, unless we’re talking about a role requiring a great deal of technical training, you will likely succeed with the choice.
Summary: Even if you follow this to a tee, there still isn’t a guarantee that you’ll have a great success story to tell. All you can do is stack the deck as much as possible in your favor & then commit yourself to helping the individual succeed.
In addition to the preceding thoughts, I also like using assessment tools like Caliper to look at how well a candidate lines up with the position’s requirements & how well the individual fits the team. When you’re down to your short list, these tools can be incredibly helpful.
Thanks & Good Wishes for a successful 2019!
Mike