Irrespective
of the size, most organizations desire to build leadership that has strategic
vision for business, penchant for people/talent management and building a sustainable
organization for future. The magnitude of stakes involved at these positions
need not be reinforced. Yet, many organizations make the moist fatal hiring
blunders at this level. Some of the most prevalent and common ones that
immeasurably impact organizations are as follows;
1. Not assigning quality time on hiring: Leadership level hiring needs high quality
formal and sometimes informal time for knowing a candidate or explaining about
organization. It is about this mutual investment of time that builds trust and
commitment and confidence. A tight time window with a targeted date for closure
only ruins the purpose and ends up queuing up worthless resumes’ , resulting
into wasteful rejections round after
round.
2. Inability to focus on “Must DO” and Can DO”: For no fault of theirs, candidates meet recruiters with their past
experience. It is the recruiters who fantasize the fitment of the candidate into
the role. More often than not, this fantasy leads to force fitment and
assumption that a candidate “will manage to handle this role”. I have seen some
very senior professionals taking this approach for leadership level hiring,
either under duress of time or just manning a position.
3. Failing to notice soft aspects and screaming gaps: It is proven time and again that the past is indicative of future
behaviour. Inability to ask the “right questions” to gauge the past behavioural
patterns often leads to missing the most probable future courses of behaviour
in the given situations. It is extremely critical for recruiters to take note
of emotional quotient, distortions, contradictions and deletions during the
interview. Having had some success with this, I have had a few cases of my interview
inferences coming near cent percent true post recruitment.
4. Segregating “ability” and “potential”: Leadership recruitment requires a clear
understanding of these two which sometimes may be interchangeably used in
literal terms. As leadership roles involve strategic investment for the
organisation, either both or the latter could be very relevant from a longer
time horizon. Ability helps leaders execute quickly, potential keeps them ahead
in the “inspirational” bracket of leadership for their given structures and
helps them to create and re-create “differential” that keeps them there.
5. Not identifying the “amiability” quotient: Leading teams requires
acceptability and buy in as the very basic qualities in leaders. All amiability
indicators like humility, poise, mannerism, interpersonal sensitivity, focus,
and ability to strike “good transactions” and receptivity may be some key
indicators of amiability quotient. Someone who has progressed to the
eligibility of leadership level hiring may be looked upon more on these than
his past successes.
Failure
in hiring the right leadership position can have destructive implications and
it may be advisable to build caution in the process and have requisite skill to
identify the right talent.
No comments:
Post a Comment