New Year, New Friends

If the past is a predictor of the future, then each new year should start with an abundance of career choices, giving both job candidates and hiring executives numerous opportunities to get acquainted.

Think “Audition” not “Interview”

Too often, people treat interviews and introductory meetings as exceptional experiences with unique and artificial rules. This kind of thinking creates superficial grounds for discovery. Instead, think of what can be gained by treating first encounters as offering representative samples of behavior rather than platforms for persuasive arguments.

Both hiring executives and candidates need to discern quickly what it might be like to work with the other person.

Candidates Beware

Given today’s climate of talent wars, candidates who are too taken with themselves because they know they are in demand can end up tripping on themselves.

Upon first introductions, it can be all too easy for candidates to move into their worst evaluative postures as they meet potential colleagues. It is important to be aware that those who immediately begin critically sizing up the potential employer will telegraph a negatively-charged “purchasing agent” mindset rather than presenting a positive, consultative selling posture.

Instead, candidates fare better entering into each introduction as though they are already happily on the team. Candidates should be auditioning how they naturally function at work on a daily basis, showing that they can comfortably share the same side of the desk with their new employers. This means entering the interview as allies of the hiring team, imagining a layout of the field of challenges spread out before them.

Next, they should collegially explore the organization’s current situation, what previously transpired and what can be anticipated in the future. That way, prospects will “audition” using a very natural and inviting approach rather than acting with an artificial “interview-like” flair.

Vantage Point of the Hiring Executive

Let’s also take a look at these encounters from the standpoint of hiring executives.

Interviewers can learn much more by soliciting questions from the candidates rather than simply quizzing them about their employment histories. By their very nature, questions raised by candidates tend to yield more valuable information about behaviors and perceptions than do their answers to questions asked by interviewers.

We’re on the Same Team

To skilled professionals, all of this may sound obvious. The reason for reinforcing these observations lies in the stilted nature of the meeting called an “interview.” The process is greatly improved and more rewarding when all involved decide that this gathering is a familiar, common event. It’s just another garden variety meeting, rather than a hurdle that needs to be crossed. The best exchanges occur when both parties presume they are already working on the same team.

Imagine the changed outcomes if candidates and hiring executives would look forward to greeting friends at the table. With this mindset, there is much to be gained and little to lose. This way, if participants should decide not to proceed forward, at least they will have made a new friend.

And one can never have too many friends.

Election vs Selection: What a Difference the "S" Makes

During election season, people are expected to participate in due diligence regarding who to vote for among a slate of offices. We carefully assess each candidate in light of the future paths that we have elected to pursue for ourselves and want for our communities, states and country.

While we as individuals do the electing, political parties in the U.S. do the selecting. Although some candidates run as independents, most of those on a ballot are selected to run by political parties. They were chosen based on the prospect of who will best move the party forward.

In an interesting and often frustrating twist, once in office or hired, the “winners” often elect to define themselves rather differently than we may have expected based upon their campaign promises, resume or talents. The reverse is also true, as politics and organizations may not live up to the candidate’s expectations once he or she is selected or voted in.

When it comes to executive search and placement, the verbs and scenarios are similar. Individuals elect favored roles, while organizations screen and select candidates they judge as best for moving the organization forward. And, when all is said and done, the twists of not living up to expectations can also ring true.

The wise adage: “Be careful what you ask for…you may get it” applies in both politics and careers.

Due Diligence in Search and Selection

Whether you are doing the hiring or are a candidate who may be hired, the degree of careful discernment in election and selection makes all the difference.

The candidate needs to apply as much (some might say, even more) thought to voting for a career opportunity as does the hiring party. Far too often, candidates imperil their futures by making a career decision on "a wing and a prayer" rather than through studied thought and research.

Surely, the hiring organizations suffer with unwise hires at times. Yet, a candidate who errs in accepting a poorly fitting opportunity must deal with the immediate fallout from the move, and the outcome will be carried career-long as well. Departed employees find themselves under greater scrutiny about their past career decisions than do the organizations that they left.

The Importance of Focus

Whether the candidate or hiring organization, many times the employment engagement is a matter of casting a net widely, rather than spearing a trophy. 

Classic job search advice suggests that “networking”, or “seeing what’s out there” is the best way to go. Meanwhile, firms also cast a wide net, whether through recruiters or job postings. Both sides are playing the odds that plenty of suitable and available matches are poised just for them.

In this classic scenario, employers set their selection criteria to facilitate the resume screening process. Meanwhile, candidates don’t participate in a process of electing their choice opportunity. Rather, they expend their energies far too widely, trying to avoid being overlooked by a potential hiring party.

Candidates don’t improve their election odds by placing a bet on every potential employer that they might approach. Our work life is not a gambling career, although there seem to be far too many employers still willing to take a gamble on selecting new hires on just that premise.

Picking a Winner

Applying due diligence on both sides of the hiring equation offers all parties the opportunity to focus on the most critical characteristics of their ideal catch. Patient exploration and spearing the trophy deals makes much better sense than casting a net and then sorting through less suited options.

What is a "Pilot Hole" Hire?

A Fable: A growing family-managed firm had reached the point where it needed to hire its first non-family executive for a newly created role. Up to this time, family members had been able to share the many hats needed to run the business. After a diligent search and assessment, the new manager comes on board--excited about the prospects of bringing innovative ideas to the company. Within six months the executive is let go--the victim of another “pilot hole” hire.

The Relationship Between a Pilot Hole and Executive Hiring

A pilot hole serves as a guide. Drilling a pilot hole before using a screw or nail to join parts together makes for a tighter fit and prevents the wood, drywall or plaster from splitting. A pilot hole paves the way for transition.

The pilot hole analogy can be applied to executive search and management. Sometimes the first person entering a new job ends up being used to pave the way for an easier transition for this individual’s successor. Often, the problem isn’t entirely with the pilot hole hire.

Adjusting to Change

When a new function is introduced to an organization, the new executive hired to lead has a tough transition to make. Previously, the duties assigned will have been collected from among several people, who may feel that losing their newly transferred duties is not so much of a relief as it is a loss of power and status. Managers used to calling their own shots may resent the arrival of the new executive. As new rules, procedures and controls are introduced, managers can feel they have lost prerogatives.

Meanwhile, the new hire must adjust to an established setting, where there is ample opportunity for the “new kid on the block” to misread cues and traditions.

When inevitable chemistry, personality or philosophical differences come to light, people can begin to talk about the new team member as “not fitting in” and may start exhibiting behavior that undermines the new executive—often criticizing style rather than substance.

Same Hole. Different Person.

Most people are hired precisely because they are different and bring something new. But in newly created roles, it is all too common that the new pro turns out to be a short- term hire.

Ironically, the next person brought into the role often shares the same credentials and interpersonal style as did the predecessor; but is accepted into the organization much more easily because of the “pilot hole” drilled by the pioneer who paved the way.

Why the turnover? Part of the issue is that staff often want to keep things as they were. Meanwhile, the new hire takes to heart the boss’ phrase “we want you to make an impact” when given marching orders. Energetically, the new professional does a cannonball dive into what appeared to be a calm pool. The resulting impact on the rest of the people can be unsettling as the new hire makes a big splash within the organization.

Avoiding a Split

Is a “pilot hole hire” inevitable? Assuming the right person was hired during the executive search process, there are ways to help avoid troubles during the transition of this new hire into a new role. Here are some tips:

1. Make certain everyone on the management team is on the same page regarding goals, expectations and support of the new hire.

2. Provide solid orientation and make it a two-way process. In addition to orienting the new hire to the organization and its workforce, provide activities that help current staff to adjust to the new person in this new role.

3. The new executive should solicit counsel on how best to prepare to “enter the water” in order to build successful common alliances.

A wise entry plan can assure a solid and lasting fit.

A Few Questions for Control Seekers

Do you hear more people claiming that their world has been turned upside down and that they have lost control of their lives, their career options, their futures?

In his 1969 book, The Age of Discontinuity: Guidelines to our Changing Society, Peter Drucker advanced the thesis that now and for the rest of time all bets are off. Drucker contended that we are confronted by sharp “discontinuities” between the patterns and trends of the past fifty years and those of the future. These discontinuities make it impossible to predict the future, because prediction inevitably involves a forward projection of current trends.

Nearly 50 years has passed since the book was published, and one can’t help but note the irony that his prediction about being unable to predict the future has come to pass.

Note to Control Seekers:

If we are indeed in charge of our lives amid discontinuity, then why are there so many shocked complaints and fears about a loss of control? Why do so many of us seek a short cut to restoring personal control?

For far too many of us, the control of our lives is perceived as in the hands of forces beyond our actions; and far too often, control seekers cannot articulate a defined target, simply stating short-term fixes. We rationalize these thoughts with justifications that something (such as government) or someone (such as a boss) controls our fate.

Lacking a sense of their endgames and purposeful direction, control seekers might take the long way around toward arriving at a plan by asking various individuals for their opinions. Whenever granted an audience they will ask: “Considering my background, experience and credentials, where do YOU think I ought to go? What is a safe bet for my future? Where might I be better off?”

If Peter Drucker was still with us, he might have responded to these seekers with questions of his own such as: “What can you contribute in this world? Where do you want to be? What knowledge are you applying to your actions?”

Where There’s a Will There’s a Way

The 20^th century Trappist monk, M. Eugene Boylan echoed the thoughts of many before him when he said: “life is defined as a self-movement, and a person is his own master.” Boylan submitted that knowledge directs our will, and our will defines our actions and our lives.

Unlike frantic control seekers, those who are diligently working toward a defined career or business plan are very comfortable discussing their endgames. They have clearly defined targets and ask only for deeper insights about prospective employers, partners, customers or acquisitions. They are well-poised to pursue each researched, willful next move.

The next time you hear a seeker complain about a loss of control or wish that someone else will reveal the next step to take, consider asking a few questions in return:

    Where are you headed?

    What is your plan?

    What do you already know about your target?

    Who are your guides?

Setting a personalized master plan can inform a healthy career/life journey. By controlling our own discerned, willful thoughts and actions (rather than conceding our future to fate) we no longer feel the need to scurry about seeking control wherever we can get it.

“What you spend years creating, others could destroy overnight. Create anyway.”

Mother Teresa

Look For Leaders Who Crave Uncertainty

Think of all the certainties many of us were so sure of just 20 years ago…

     Banks can’t fail
     The European Union is unbreakable
     Terrorism won’t hit U.S. soil
     Phones are for talking with people
     Clergy are above reproach
     Cars can’t drive themselves
     Wise executives take stock options over cash compensation
     The morning news is delivered in print format

And then things changed.

Yet, things always change. That is why when it comes to succession and executive

selection, it pays to favor candidates who are comfortable with uncertainty.

“We live in uncertain times,” is a mantra that has been voiced since the beginning of time, with each generation calling theirs the most uncertain of all. So, it is understandable why people long for some semblance of certainty in their lives.

In fact, we are literally hard-wired to crave the stability of foregone conclusions.

  

Certainty is Static

Trends in neuroscience research show that the brain stores every bit of our memories and actions. It uses this information to map out how things will be--not just for each moment, but also for the long term. This concept of predictability is so powerful that it serves as the foundation for Artificial Intelligence.

When the brain senses the loss of predictability, it moves into a fight or flight mode. Thus, our desire for the safety of certainty. Yet danger lurks in this false sense of safety, for our minds are subject to revisionist histories that spin and reinterpret facts and events. This can cloud even our most confident illusions of certainty (which are always associated with the past rather than the future).

Uncertainty Drives Possibilities

While some of us have personalities that are continually drawn to the stability of certainty, others thrive in less predictable environments. Those who soar in uncertainty, but who are grounded in reality make the best leaders; and those of us who need to feel safe deserve to be led by only the most bold, mature and flexible people at the helm. That is why, when searching for executive leadership, it is best to refrain from candidates who are most comfortable with the status quo.

To manage in this uncertain world, we need leaders who crave to be in the vanguard, get their energy from “out-of-the-box” thinking, embrace uncertainty as a doorway to possibilities, and are willing to continually assess their illusions of certainty.  

The next time you are charged with responsibility to select a leader, resist the temptation to gravitate to candidates who talk in terms of stability and security. Pay attention to how much importance each candidate places on surprise, ambiguity and the unknown.

The people in your organization will attach themselves solidly to a leader who is unafraid yet prudent; ambitious without being foolhardy; eager rather than tentative. The future depends on candidates who crave uncertainty.

“Without the element of uncertainty…the greatest business triumph would be dull, routine and eminently unsatisfying.”

J. Paul Getty

Image courtesy of winnond@FreeDigitalPhotos.net

Avoid Language That Positions Your Past as Target Practice

In career management, we frequently hear seekers use negative, self-labeling words. Many of these choices can have a dulling impact on the listener, especially at a time when seekers need to differentiate themselves as being exceptional. These negative terms are akin to taking target practice on yourself.

Here’s a review of the stale terms that seekers commonly use as they attempt to land new roles; alongside suggestions for more helpful language choices:

I was downsized: An organization may have been merged, divested, redesigned, outsourced or automated resulting in the separation of employees. But never will any human be physically “downsized.” Wouldn’t it be better to declare a personalized, future-oriented target? An example might be: “I have targeted (next role) within (organization)." Affirming a chosen career path positions you as that rare find—someone who is working with a defined plan. This gives an interested organization the opportunity to size up its future plans against you as the seeker’s declared targets.

I lost my job: Really? How do you lose or misplace a job? Being released from a job is not a sin. Instead of emphasizing loss, try affirming a clearly chosen future such as: “I am pursuing work as (role) with (organization).” Affirmative statements will spark curious inquiry about your forward-moving direction and shift the focus from loss to potential gain.

They offered me outplacement: Professional outplacement can provide useful support, but these services are best used as a wisely supportive, silent partner. Describing your career status using this terminology suggests being on the receiving end of change. In fact, Merriam-Webster dictionary defines the term “outplacement” as “the process of easing unwanted or unneeded executives out of a company by providing company-paid assistance.” Rather than talking about outplacement, try leading with language that is reflective of a person who has assessed and defined a healthy career path. This, in turn, will prompt listeners to ask questions focused on your future.

When self-marketing, a clear, proactive and targeted statement will certainly get you further than: “I lost my job when the firm downsized and so they provided outplacement.” Keep the focus on the work you want with the firm(s) you have targeted.

Try affirming your future rather than shooting self-inflicted arrows at your past. Your aim will pay much greater dividends.

*Image by renjithkrishnan@freedititalphotos.net

A Brief Discussion of Time

It seems like we are always chasing time, sometimes quite literally.

In the lead-up to the latest solar eclipse, stories abounded about “eclipse chasers.” These are people who travel thousands of miles in quest of being on the path of totality during solar eclipses.  A common refrain for many of these chasers is that there is nothing else in the world like the descent of darkness. Some say it is “as though time stands still.”

Abdicating time to external forces is a natural fallback for many of us. We talk about “not having enough time in the day” as if others are in control of how we allocate the use of the minutes, hours and years we are granted here on earth.

Time may be a limited element of physics, but how we spend it isn’t. As noted physicist and author, Stephen Hawking explains: “Time and space are finite in extent, but they don’t have any boundary or edge.” Hawking suffers from a debilitating condition, ALS, which struck him as a youth. Neither Hawking’s contributions to comprehending the universe nor use of his time have been bound by his circumstances.

Daily we hear folks (and ourselves) complain about not having enough time, or that we are chasing time. A widely shared plaint, but it is hard to be entirely sympathetic, since we are equally charged with time management.

A Matter of Choice

An article in a hometown newspaper caught my attention years ago. It was about the death of a young woman who died in an auto wreck. The story carried some of the pastor’s remarks made during the funeral. A straight “A” student, the woman earned a full ride to college, and spent years of her young life volunteering for many causes. She was a loving daughter, sister, musician and tutor—all acts that demonstrated her generous spirit. She lived her life well.

None of us share the same health, security, capacity or lifespan; but by midnight on any given day we will have shared the same 24 hours. When we surrender to others the power for managing this time, not only do we cede a measure of control, we also place the assessment of our progress in the hands of those who call our tune.

All of us carry personal limitations and new problems to field with plenty of reasons for lacking enough time to meet expectations. Yet as conditions change, whether by accident or by the decisions of others, we always retain responsibility for our own choices. In the end, we are stewards of our own time.

Invest Wisely

As noted in the pastor’s eulogy: “At the end of the day, it isn’t how long of a life we have, but how well our life is lived.” Our challenge is to minimize occasions where we want to throw up our hands in frustration, using these experiences to reflect on with how we can invest wisely in the time we have been given. It is helpful to call upon our elders’ counsel and remember that even when darkness descends, it is not the end of the world.

“Time is the scarcest resource and unless it is managed nothing else can be managed.”  Peter Drucker

Phtoto Credit: NASA

A Good Reason Not to Hire Relatives

"If there is something about the candidate you don't like during the interview,

you will like it even less if you go ahead and hire the person." 

                                           --HR Department Poster

 

Executive search publications and news headlines often talk about the war for talent, highlighting the enduring shortage of top candidates for leadership positions. While this puts us on high alert, this is old news to savvy observers who have been paying attention to the warning signs that fewer finalists seem to fit hiring specs.

Could this be why we are so quick to set aside a rare prospect over what was a seemingly minor (but unfavorably noticed) quality displayed during interviews?

Desire to Hire and to be Hired

We all have favorite anecdotes about vexing variances between on-the-job behavior and the splash a person made during interviews with hiring executives. These interviews can generate an unwelcome paradox.

First, in a desire to get hired, candidates move into self-promotion mode, having practiced their pitches until polished enough to appear natural. As a result, candidates may inadvertently realize their worst fears: They get the job, but regret the new role.

And then there are the interviewers who are anxious to make a good hire and fearful of letting good prospects get away. As such, they sweep little annoyances under the rug as deftly as possible so that all the inconvenient thoughts they didn’t like are out-of-sight and out-of-mind.

But then, aren’t we supposed to be understanding, flexible, considerate and open-minded about our fellow humans’ quirks? And, we don’t want to appear intolerant by picking at social, values-oriented and interpersonal gaffes or flubs. After all, most people are nervous when being interviewed.

Acting More Like Relatives

During the interview process, perhaps it would be helpful to apply the same intuitive frame of reference used when we choose doctors, friends or a potential mate. Why not apply the same type of thinking when hiring management team members?

A political lobbyist once said: “You help someone get elected and think you’ve made a friend, but then they start acting like relatives.” There lies the rub. Sometimes the people we hire begin acting like relatives carrying the same annoyances or issues we noticed during the interview process.

Use your familiar friend-making judgment when in an interview—whether you are the hiring executive or the candidate. Friends don’t try to fool friends. And friends have a mutual understanding of what does and doesn’t matter to each other.

Pay attention when there is something you don’t like in an interview. Is it a friend’s quirk or a pesky relative’s fatal flaw?

P