The first six months are critical to the long term success of the employee. Many develop 90-day or 180-day plans to outline what they want to accomplish. Depending on the organization or department, the immediate needs will vary. Successful on boarding includes a thoughtful plan combined with effective execution. Using the Decision Making Process we will be able to solve the dilemma in selecting the needed person for the job. I need to hire or place the right person for the job. The problem using DMP is, the person I want to hire is not qualified but wants to do the job or the person that is qualified doesn`t want to do the job.
1) Identifying a problem The problem is that either the job was not right for the person hired because he is not qualified or the candidate hired was not the right person for the position because he is not willing to do the job. In many cases, the causes of failure come from both sources. Fortunately, organizations can guard against this failures by adopting a thorough and thoughtful methodology for both the selection and on boarding of new employees. 2) Identifying Decision Criteria Organizations are motivated to identify the most effective match of individual to position,
Although job descriptions are plentiful, often they are not effective at defining the subtleties of the role, its day-to-day requirements, the challenges of the position, or how success will be measured. If the organization does not clearly understand both the specifics of the role and the nuances that will contribute to success or failure, the selection process will not be targeted to selecting a candidate with a precise fit for the job or for the organization.
As a result, talented employees may be placed in positions where their chances for success is small, or where they do not gain satisfaction from the work. 3) Allocating Weights to the Critera Successful employees possess complex sets of characteristics that help them succeed. While there is no single way to be a successful employee, the absence of certain key characteristics significantly reduces the potential for success. Cannot learn fast enough to keep up with the demands of the job As business becomes more complex, the inability to learn quickly and efficiently becomes a major derailer. It is a mistake to assume that the individual’s resume is evidence that he or she must be smart enough.
Further, it is very difficult to determine intellectual strength based on a typical job interview. In an interview setting, great common sense can masquerade as intelligence. Although common sense may be necessary for success, rarely is it enough. Intelligence is the single best predictor of success in executive roles. Some writers have recently suggested that other components of personality supersede intelligence in predicting success. However, studies of executive leaders have shown that most of the slower learners have already been eliminated.
Once the slower learners have been eliminated, other factors do become more critical. But, to assume that raw intellect is a less important predictor would be a mistake. Does not apply intellectual resources effectively: common sense, strategic thinking, analytical thinking, and critical thinking. Not only are successful employees quick thinkers, but they also invest the time to reflect on What they have learned. They analyze details, separate the important from the unimportant, focus on a multi-year perspective, minimize wishful thinking, and recognize the complexity of business problems and solutions.
Less successful employees, even those with exceptional intellect, depend on their intelligence and often fail to apply strong problem solving and decision making skills. They try to figure things out as they go along, failing to critically assess what they learn and relying too much on “thinking on their feet. ” While this may serve them well in less complex roles, at the senior level of complex organizations, it can result in overlooking business obstacles or disruptive technologies. While the less successful employees may lead in an acceptable fashion, their organizations fall short of greatness.
In the last decade, there has been a tremendous amount of research into the interpersonal skills that are necessary for success in leadership roles. These skills and characteristics have been referred to as “emotional intelligence,” “practical intelligence,” “authenticity” and a multitude of other names. No one possesses all the interpersonal skills addressed in the literature. Indeed, some are almost mutually exclusive (such as action orientation and cautiousness). However, when an executive lacks too many of the required interpersonal skills, potential for success falls dramatically.
Some of the most common personality derailers include: • The employee blows mistakes out of proportion, taking them as personal affronts and reacting with unexpected emotional outbursts. • The employee possesses a basic level of distrust in others and their intentions. Executives typically get what they expect to get from others, even if that is weak performance. • The leader lacks transparency, appearing unauthentic. Even those who interact with the executive frequently do not believe they know the executive, understand what motivates him or her, or know what values are important to the executive.
Without this level of transparency, others rarely develop a high level of loyalty. • The employee does not truly care about others and their wellbeing. His or her focus is on the bottom line, on achieving results, and personal success. The executive does not posses a deep rooted desire for others to be happy and successful. • The leader’s need for recognition results in a failure to share credit for successes. The executive focuses on those projects that have the greatest personal visibility even when they are not most important for the long term success of the organization.
Further, by taking credit for subordinates’ successes, morale, motivation, and focus deteriorate. • In verbal communications, the leader hears the words but fails to understand the emotions behind them. The executive lacks insight into others, their feelings and how to tap into their motivations. At times, such executives become over-dependent on formal, written communication. • The employee is not confident of his or her ability to meet the expectations of the position. While a certain level of humility builds loyalty, too much humility results in a lack of confidence in the executive’s ability to lead.
If the executive is not sure where to go, others are not likely to enthusiastically follow. • The opposite of the derailer described above would be an employee who is excessively self-confident, believing he or she always knows the best course of action and rationalizing away mistakes as the fault of others. Such an employee may act quickly and impulsively, not recognizing the need for thoughtful analysis. • The employee analyzes problems and business opportunities so extensively that action is delayed beyond the point where it could provide the greatest value.
While a certainamount of analysis is appropriate, too much can appear as indecisiveness, procrastination or a lack of commitment to the success of the organization. • The employee’s passion for change is so strong that even those processes and products that are extremely successful are disrupted. The pace of change becomes so great that employees feel unable to keep up, and eventually, they psychologically opt out of the success of the next new initiative. 4. ) Developing Alternatives The first alternative would be to hire the person who is qualified yet who is not prepared to do the job.
Even for a specific position, a variety of leadership styles can be effective. Similar to interpersonal skills, however, the leader who lacks interest for the job is likely to succeed. The second alternative is to hire the person who is not qualified to do the job. This person who is willing to do the job but does not have the right amount or level of experience required. This is so because there are some roles that require specific experiences and job assignments as a precursor to success. 5. ) Analyzing Alternatives If we choose the first alternative, there are some common sources of leadership that helps the company to succeed. Advantage: • The employee who focuses on the right qualities can be productive in the company with his needed talent.
For example, an interpersonal connectedness outweighs an objective assessment of competencies. The result is an organization with a sufficient number of “A” level performers. As a result, organizational performance still increases, even though some of the company aim is not met. Disadvantage: • While many talented employees will develop with or without help, others require the guidance of a development-oriented leader. Without that guidance, progress tends to be slower and less
focused. As a result, the employee is less effective at transforming the organization into a higher performing unit. • The executive fails to effectively communicate expectations. This may be due to an assumption that expectations are already understood, a pre-occupation with other issues, or a preference to work with data rather than people. If we choose the second alternative, that is to hire the person who is not qualified to do the job. Some of the advantages are: • The executive knows how to help others develop because he himself is given the chance or opportunity to grow in the company
• The executive can have a straightforward performance discussions. Rather than addressing a deficiency when it is first recognized, the employee’s learning opportunity is present. Some of this disadvantages are: • Functional employees who have never had significant profit-and-loss responsibilities are not well prepared for a senior general management position. • Employees who have moved too quickly from one position to another may have learned how to have a quick impact, but not learned how to create sustained competitive advantage.
• Employees who have never experienced a major setback in their careers are not well prepared to manage the impact when such a setback occurs, as it inevitably will. The“skinned knees” obtained by employees in challenging assignments facilitate a greater likelihood of success in a higher, broader or more complex job. 6) Selecting an Alternative For me, it is wiser to choose the second alternative, that is to hire the person who is not qualified to do the job yet willing to do the job. When a position has been vacant for a significant period of time,
it is wise that organization to hire the willing person who has the right attitude to do the job rather than to compromise on the talented yet unwilling to give their best on the job. Some familiar statement is, “I know he is not ready for the job, but I will help him develop after he is hired. ” The other one is, “He will probably never be great in the job, but for that job, we really don’t need greatness, just solid performance. ” I know that the organization will not regret the selection and neither expends additional resources to help the person in coping the job with his right attitude.
7) Evaluating Decision Effectiveness Some executives are well known because spectacular successes in prior jobs have embellished their reputations. Or, some candidates might be considered strong because they have worked at a company with a reputation for developing successful executives. While prior success is a powerful predictor of future success, one does not automatically follow on the other. If the culture is dramatically different, or the expectations of the job are different, the job might not be the best fit for the employee.
Most executives (or employees at any level for that matter) spend more waking hours in their working environment than with their spouse and family. Before getting married, potential partners usually invest a significant amount of time in the courtship, thinking through how the relationships will grow over the years. Yet, when deciding to “marry” a new employee, organizations can be impressed for the wrong reasons. The best organizations invest significantly before the selection to minimize the possibility of key derailers interfering with the
success of the new employee. In evaluating decision effectiveness the executive needs to ask the following questions: • Do I understand the job, the expectations, and the subtleties surrounding the role and how the organization views success in this role? • Is my decision well formed and consistent with the expectations in the new organization? Do I have the confidence necessary to contribute, yet the humility to ask questions that will guide the organization to succeed?
If the executive tries to think and decide carefully, the executive begins making staffing, organizational structure before accurately assessing what is working well in hiring or selecting a new personnel. This will in turn bring productivity to the organization for he was able to determine how the new employee’s strengths can be leveraged for the benefit of the organization.
References: Gaertner, K. N. and Nollen, D. D. (1992) Intentions and desire among executives. Human Relations, 45. pp. 447-65 Meindl, J. R. (1992) Reinventing leadership: Advances in Theory and Research Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs,N. J. Shacleton, V. (1995) Business Leadership, Routledge, London.