When the candidate pool is too shallow to swim...

He ain't all that...

You can't fix stupid...

A part of my practice (does it scare anyone but me that what I do is called "practice??") today evaluating potential key talent for client companies. And I meant what I said above, "You can't fix stupid."

If a candidate lacks some required skills, can you hire them anyway? Sure, it's your company. I would, however, advise you to ensure that the following 3 conditions exist:

1. The candidate really is who she says she is. This is important, obviously.

They applied to a position they are unqualified for, and are trying to convince you they can do it. Be careful they don't get "too" convincing, and get a little loose with the truth regarding their qualifications and past performance. Stranger things have happened...

2. Speaking of performance, theirs must be primo.

You are already taking a chance on qualifications; don't compound that effort by stretching on ability as well. Only crème de la crème in their known responsibilities should be considered for stretch roles.

Mediocre applicants... well, wish 'em the best in their job search.

3. Finally, you can't fix stupid. Or lazy.

Make sure the candidate is smart enough to learn new skills, particularly the challenging kind you've been unable to find. Look for indicators that they've learned on the fly. And for Pete's sake, gauge their general desire to work when interviewing and investigating their background.

It's hard enough to develop new skills with a new employee; you don't want to be further hamstrung with a known slug.

The war for top talent is as active as ever; the high unemployment data does not, of course, translate directly to better available job-seekers. As it becomes more and more difficult to discover that "perfect" candidate, we'll be making adjustments and trade-offs such as this on a regular basis. Better to know what we're getting ourselves into, and how to mitigate the potential downsides, than to be blindsided down the road.

But that's just me...

KB

Kevin Berchelmann
www.triangleperformance.com

Talent Management Strategy Must Match Business Goals

If you really believe you'll succeed, why aren't you planning?

So, you spend time, effort, and money on charting a viable SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities & threats). Flip charts and laptops everywhere, you determine you've got a great grasp on reality in your company and industry. Next, your smart minds put their heads together and create a future that Orson Welles would be proud of - one that is actually visionary, and takes real data and information into account.

You trend financials, benchmark with other, equally astute and successful companies and industries. In the end, you bless it, print it, bind it, and distribute it. If you are in the top 5% of firms, you even create a mission that supports it, and an execution plan that appears to match that incredible vision.

You work your plan.

Then, 6 months later, sitting around that same conference table in those same, familiar chairs, you lament to a group of like-minded, equally talented executives that, "We're doing it guys -- we're kicking butt. Now, if only we had the management talent, we could really make this work."

What??

Did you not believe your research, SWOT, or strategy? Did you feel uncomfortable in your comparison benchmarks? Did you not really trust that $250K of McKinsey consultant's input?? (sorry, had to throw that in...)

Why on earth would we spend the effort required to create viable strategy and subsequent plans for product, service, and marketing results, and not spend that same effort analyzing, identifying, and creating leadership talent we will need when we get there?

Because we're still not making Talent Management an integral part of our strategy.

And folks, I'm not saying "Human Resources," I'm saying Talent Management. We need to make that same effort -- SWOT analysis, current state identification, desired outcomes, competitive benchmarks -- in identifying the supporting talent management strategy, for 2 reasons: First, to make sure we have the horsepower to carry out those grandiose plans and execution items toward our vision, and as importantly, in case we actually achieve our results.

Don't get caught unprepared. Spend the same effort ensuring you have the leadership and management talent available -- sourced and/or developed -- when launching any viable business strategy and execution effort.

You can't get there without it... but then, you already knew that.

But that's just me...

KB

Kevin Berchelmann
www.triangleperformance.com

It's called Leadership, not Jerkship

(Re-posted from my newsletter, just because I like it...)

-- Just be nice...

You can be a leader, or you can be a jerk. You can't be both, no matter what you think, and no matter how hard you try. (note: I didn't say you couldn't be a "manager." A business card doth not a leader make...)

Leadership requires vision, and the wherewithal to execute to that vision, convincing and motivating those following to do "more" (called "discretionary effort") in support and pursuit of that leader's vision.

Being a jerk is in direct opposition to that effort.

So, what's a leader to do, assuming s/he wants to avoid jerkdom? This ain't exactly rocket surgery, but here are a few tips...

1. Do Ask, Don't Tell. Yes, DADT does leadership. You really can ask instead of barking out orders like a drill sergeant. Any employee not living under a rock for the last 50+ years doesn't really believe that their boss' question "Would you please do this for me?" has an option of "no" for an answer.

Same results for you, better results for the employee.

2. Show some love... No, not literally, Casanova, so calm your jets. But leaders, you've got to show - actively demonstrate - real compassion if you expect to develop the trust necessary for a positive employee relationship. I hate to use the tired cliché, "employees don't care how much you know until they know how much you care," but it's true here.

Someone must look after the employees' well-being and best interests. If not you, leader, they'll simply turn to someone or something else.
Like a union. Or a chronic complainer/commiserator. Or your competitor.

3. Be nice. Those who know me know I'm not one of those soft, fluffy types. My leadership facilitation doesn't include kooshie balls and plastic gumby figurines. But you'll find if you just "act nice" with employees, good things will happen (and you may just enjoy your day a bit more, too).

In the movie "Roadhouse" (I'm old, I like movies, so shoot me...), Patrick Swayze plays Dalton, a "Cooler" - sort of a bouncer's bouncer - in a rough bar. When asked by some of his underling bouncer staff about what they should do when trouble erupts, he tells them simply to "be nice."
"Be nice until it's time to not be nice." Good advice.

I have this client (my typical story-starter), and I'm facilitating some of their teams, simply to help them realize the added benefits of working really well together toward common goals. This team's leader is a fairly senior manager, and he mentioned to me that one of his frontline leaders wasn't all that enthused about attending our sessions.

In fact, this leader told him that he "don't need no Dr. Phil telling me to make nice with my employees."

My simple question to that frontline leader (never mind the dubious-but-cool reference to Dr. Phil) would be: I'm not sure about that... do you??

Thanks, Don.

But that's just me...

KB

Kevin Berchelmann www.triangleperformance.com