Tim Walsh writes a blog about Leadership and Sports. Recently he wrote an entry entitled A Slippery Slope. You can read the entire post here.
In his post, Tim bemoans the fact that, in his opinion, the Baseball Hall of Fame committed an error recently when it admitted Andre Dawson.
Tim has nothing personal against Andre Dawson; in fact, he feels he was a good, maybe very good, player in his day. Tim’s point is that Andre Dawson doesn’t meet the standards that were once considered the base line for getting in the Hall of Fame. In his opinion, Andre Dawson wasn’t great. Tim believes that by allowing Dawson in, the standards are automatically lower for future candidates. They will only have to be as good as Dawson.
Whether you agree with Tim or not, he makes a great point and suggests that this applies to employees as well. He explicitly challenges all employers to maintain very high standards for hiring employees.
At EOS, we agree. To help CEO/owners and their leadership teams accomplish this we provide a tool we call the People Analyzer. The People Analyzer is based upon the company’s core values and an assessment of the employees capabilities for the position he or she is in.
We asked the leaders to set a bar in the People Analyzer which mandates the minimum acceptable standards for employees. We exhort the leadership team to use this tool when hiring, compensating, reviewing and terminating employees. No exceptions!
Adhering to employee standards is a challenge and can be difficult. But it will pay off in the long run.
Does your company have a well understood standard for all employee personnel actions? Do you agree with them? Do you use them? Do all managers use them consistently?
Photo credit: AuburnNewYork
{ 5 comments… read them below or add one }
Traditionally, employers focus on two questions when evaluating a potential
hire: (1) Can they do the job? (2) Will they do it? A 3rd question is rarely asked and the most important: Why will they do it? Why is accepting this job, at this point in their life, the right strategy for their life and career? If this question were asked, it would open up the conversation to a much deeper and honest communication leading to “best fit” hiring decisions.
Skip: On point! You have to go beyond what appears to be the obvious. You have to try to determine if they not only understand the job and have the experience to do it well, but do they really want the job. Asking why they want it is good.
Ed
Ed, et all — One of my standard late stage interview questions is along the tact of “given what you now know the job to be, why does this position make sense for you to take?” I of course follow that up with further qualification questions, but it seems many of the interviewing prep books/systems touch on this and I’ll get a politically correct response. The candidates who can also show some passion in the discussion make immediate points. Frankly I’ve hired people who weren’t quite as well “technically” qualified in favor of people who wanted the position for thier own right reason. One managers opinion…
I think part of the problem with the Hall of Fame is that nobody is quite sure what the standard for entry should be because of the recent spate of players who used (or may have used) performance-enhancing drugs. I think the right way to approach a Hall of Fame is to assume certain guidelines but let the voters — who presumably can make the appropriate comparisons — determine who belongs and who doesn’t (and Baseball requires a preponderance of the voters to agree).
What’s messy in sports and in business is that some people excel to such a degree in one category that you forgive their failures in others. It would be so easy if the Hall of Fame voters had a simple template to use to determine yes or no, but if there was such a thing then we’d have no need for voters.
Business is the same way. We don’t take the time to assess that which differentiates some employees from everyone else…their value proposition. A lot of businesses have released a lot of great people over the past few years because of what those people made, how old they were, how long (or short) they had been with the company, or how nervous they made the decision maker who was worrying about his or her own job. And now those businesses are suffering because inevitably the great depart under those circumstances and the mediocre remain.
I lost an opportunity recently because the company was looking for a specific skill to solve a specific problem. The hiring manager acknowledged the decision process today is different from just a few years ago when they were looking for great people who would likely make multiple contributions in different areas. And I don’t know if that’s a good thing or it’s bad.
Sorry if this wasn’t totally on point. Andre Dawson feels like a Hall of Famer to me in part because he made everyone around him a better player. We need more people like that.
Peter
Bulldog Simplicity blog: http://www.posborne1.wordpress.com
Peter:
There are no simple answers to the Hall of Fame dilemma and the job search challenge. EOS Implementers coach owners and leadership teams to focus on shared values and the considered assessment of whether some one understands the job, wants the job and is capable of excelling at the job. This focus should be true when you are considering hiring someone and when you are reviewing their past performance. Things change over time after all.
Perhaps what you are saying about Dawson is that he shared the values of his teammates? Shared values are critical to being a great teammate, but they don’t predict super star status – only performance does. It would appear to me that Dawson fell a bit short in a few areas. But then, I’ll leave that assessment to true baseball fans, which deoesn’t include me:)
Ed