Hiring the Right Person for the Team; Missing Link to Strengthen the Chain
What do we look for in our crystal ball to hire the right person? How do we know if this candidate or that one will be
the person to take the team to the next level? Is it skill sets or years of industry experience? Is it the ability to make
the hiring committee laugh or pick the correct answers on the generic questionnaire that HR requires? These are all fine
criteria, but choosing the right candidate is more subtle than any of these combined and more complex
than the response to any one. It is an art and a science.
This real-life case illustrates one company's ability to know the difference between the candidate with the best skill
sets and longest time in the industry, and the candidate who would be the best person to augment the team. This
company knew that skills can be taught and experience can be gained, but arriving with the ability to help a team gel
and prosper from within, THAT was the stuff of excellence. Those skills would be invaluable and rare. Great leaders build
winning teams. They have the discipline to choose what they need, not what they want, or what someone tells them they
should have. This company wanted greatness. They had the courage and foresight to set their bar high. And, for their
wisdom, what they won was even greater than what they could have imagined.
The CEO of a successful company brought me on board to work with a relatively young management team and their chosen
hiring committee. Their task was to interview and select from the top five a candidate who best fit their existing management team.
For those who have done hiring at the professional level, you know it is a time-consuming and complex endeavor. The
time, energy, and resources it takes to locate, hire, train, evaluate, and maintain an employee are incredible. If this
investment didn't give a return on their investment (for example, if they had to terminate and start all over again), it
would have been damaging at best. There might be lost time on projects, frustrations, overtime, etc. Or, choosing the
wrong candidate could have been catastrophic at worst. Think wrongful termination lawsuits or other potential liabilities.
Those after-the-fact realities noted, it was my charge to bring an outsider's perspective to the management team and their
hiring committee. Along those lines, I asked them about their goals.
The first goal they shared with me was to just "fill the position as quickly as possible." They wanted to look at the data
(e.g., work history, education, and skill sets) and, if appropriate and available, look at personality, behavior, and fit
with the team.
Their second goal was to make sure that they stayed within the guidelines delivered by HR. Then, through what appeared to me
to be a generic, cookie-cutter process, a candidate recommendation would be made. A candidate would be hired and they could
get on with the next task at hand.
I shared with this team that my job was to make the process meaningful and successful in the long and short runs. They
had their focus. I had mine: to help build this management team, guide their development, and help them grow, so they could
increase market share by bringing on board the right candidate for their unique team. Before we could even choose
candidates, I stated, we needed to really look at what the team had now and what it needed. What skills did they possess
and what did they lack?
The current management team consisted of twelve younger and four older members. All members, regardless of age, were
highly skilled in their respective areas or specialty. The younger team members did not have the wisdom, patience and long-range
perspective that came with experience, but they were cutting-edge in other respects. The four older members were strong at
maintaining thoughtful customer and business objectives. Both groups brought a unique and necessary sense of perspective.
Together, this team had many strengths, but communication was not one. As further evidence of this, their director shared
with me that he was constantly trying to bridge the gap in their styles, their backgrounds, and their preferences. He said he
was expending an inordinate amount of energy and resources to do so. With the diverse talents and experience these individuals
brought to the table, they had the makings of an outstanding team, but what they needed was a person who could understand and
unify them from the inside.
With that information, we were ready to begin. Many candidates were interviewed in the first round. Five were chosen, but as
usual, the decision was really between only two.
Of these two, the team had some real choices to make. At first glance candidate number one possessed all the right stuff.
He had a good education, good skill sets, and a great personality. He had the interview committee laughing and practically
eating out of his hand. It was likely that when he left the interview, he believed (and rightfully) that he had knocked
that ball so far out of the park that it was still going up. The hiring committee was duly impressed. The problem was,
although he looked great on paper, he did not possess the skills that this unique team needed to grow to the next level — AS A
TEAM. It was my job to ask these questions and make arguments for waiting until all committee members could answer
"yes" to every one. Bottom line: was this candidate going to be able to add value to the team or was he simply more of the
same? Did she or he possess the necessary ingredients to take this team to the next level?
Their answers were telling. He was like us, they said. They had enough of us, I suggested. They needed someone else.
Candidate number two also had a good education. He had a decent skill set and a pleasing personality. In the interview process,
he was pleasant, likable, and more of a Jack-of-All-Trades type. For some on the committee, this made him look like the weaker
of the two top candidates, but again it was my task to ask questions that would make the committee choose the best person for
their team. Was he going to be able to add value to the team or was he simply more of the same? Did he possess the necessary
ingredients to take this team to the next level?
They all agreed he had something that was different enough, but he still fit. They stated that he had a quiet cohesiveness
that got us all talking to each other through him. He was more mature than some of the younger team members, but still young
enough to "get" their culture, their metaphors, and their unique styles. He was old enough to have perspective and depth of
personality to bridge the gap between the two worlds of the younger and older team members. He had a wealth of practical experience
and a calming nature that they stated would become invaluable in pulling their diverse, sometimes diva-like personalities together.
He had the combination of talents, temperament, and tradecraft to pull them together into a powerful and invincible management
team. Yes, they were all specialists and he was more of a generalist, but in those reflective moments, they saw that he was what
they had needed all along. As they reflected about the stories and examples he told in his interview, they realized he displayed
the behaviors and personality traits that would elevate this team to the next level. In short, he would be the glue that could
hold this team together as they grew and excelled. His calm would make them unshakeable.
They didn't need "yes" people surrounding them. They didn't need anymore highly specialized experts. They didn't need more youth
or even more experience, per se. They needed harmony and cohesiveness. How was that measured? How could they or any company have
advertised for that?
This team discovered that sometimes it is wisest to hire the person who can respectfully challenge you and others. Or it may
be best to hire the candidate who can help you think and struggle for the right answer. It isn't always best to choose the
smartest or funniest or the one with the obvious career success. It's a tough call and one that takes real thought and consideration.
This team decided they wanted to win the war, not just play kings for the day.
Three years later, he is still their glue and his value has long since been acknowledged. The company and this team needed him
then and continue appreciate his fit today.
