It is all well and good to encourage everyone to study STEM. However, job success relies on more than education alone.
Most all new hires are motivated so why do so many new employees seem to lose their motivation over time?
1. Competence, without it job success is unlikely.
2. Cultural Fit, without it successful working relationships are difficult to build and maintain.
3. Job Talent, without it lasting job success is unlikely at best.
Empowering a workforce is easy to do; have all executives, managers, and supervisors do their jobs well all of the time. The hard part is getting the executives to do their jobs well, the next hardest part is getting managers to do their jobs well, followed by supervisors doing their jobs well. Employees will be doing their jobs well if everyone above them is doing their jobs well. Look out, employee engagement is about to take hold. Some employers want to skip the executives, managers and supervisor parts and go right to the employees, but that is not how employees get engaged.
The reason employee engagement starts before the job offer is made is that we need to hire employees for their internal motivation.
As they say, "Everything that’s controllable has a person connected to it," and when discussing employee problems that person is a manager or an executive or the CEO.
Internal motivation, unlike external motivation, is not under the control of the employer. Managers who know this don't make the mistake of presuming that they can change employees' internal motivation.
When there are disengaged or problem employees we need not look beyond managers and executives.
- Too many employees are in the wrong jobs, i.e., management errors.
- Too many managers are in the wrong jobs, i.e., executive errors.
- Too many executives are in the wrong jobs, i.e., CEO errors.
- Too many managers and executives Reward A hoping for B.
- Poorly behaving employees are tolerated, i.e., management errors.
- Poorly behaving managers are tolerated, i.e., executive errors.
- Poorly behaving executives are tolerated, i.e., CEO errors.
- In other words, we get who we hire and who we promote.
If we want to break the cycle, then begin hiring the right people for all positions.
We need to hire employees for their behaviors not just their competence and cultural fit. The best candidates, i.e., the most sought after candidates, may or may not be a good hire.
• Competence is the King of job performance.
• Talent is the Queen of job performance.
• Potential is the Prince of job performance.
• Education is the Princess of job performance.
• Experience is the Court Jester of job performance.
Competence and Talent rule job performance.
There are many factors to consider when hiring talent but first we need to define talent unless "hiring talent" means "hiring employees."
Everyone wants to hire for talent but if we can't answer the five questions below with specificity, we can't hire for talent.
1. How do we define talent?
2. How do we measure talent?
3. How do we know a candidate’s talent?
4. How do we know what talent is required for each job?
5. How do we match a candidate’s talent to the talent demanded by the job?
Employers need to assess for:
- Cultural Match (Cultural Fit)
- Skills Match (Competence)
- Job Match (Talent)
Employees' lack of engagement starts with the CEO.
CEOs hire the managers.
Managers hire the employees.
Employees don’t hire themselves.
When there are disengaged or problem employees we need not look beyond managers and executives.
* Too many employees are in the wrong jobs, i.e., management errors.
* Too many managers are in the wrong jobs, i.e., executive errors.
* Too many executives are in the wrong jobs, i.e., CEO errors.
* Too many managers and executives Reward A hoping for B.
* Poorly behaving employees are tolerated, i.e., management errors.
* Poorly behaving managers are tolerated, i.e., executive errors.
* Poorly behaving executives are tolerated, i.e., CEO errors.
In other words, we get who we hire and who we promote.
Most all new hires are motivated so why do so many new employees seem to lose their motivation over time?
1. Competence, without it job success is unlikely.
2. Cultural Fit, without it successful working relationships are difficult to build and maintain.
3. Job Talent, without it lasting job success is unlikely at best.
Most employers do not address Job Talent.
Leadership is more often than not an avocation but for most leaders it is a vocation.
**************
Avocation can be understood as ‘that which one does’ whilst vocation is something to which one feels called. Vocation sits at an altogether deeper level and when tapped into, provides a source of direction and motivation. For some their vocation is all too apparent whilst for others it is the result of deep exploration and self-awareness. The tragedy is that many go through life preoccupied with a sense of avocation that serves to keep them from their vocation. How often have you heard someone say, “I really wanted to be a teacher (or artist or whatever) but I was compelled to become an accountant”? It speaks of a life lived down a path poorly chosen and is usually filled with regret and sometimes resentment.
Sometimes, of course, it is a whole lot easier to fall into an avocation. It is more convenient, more practical and conforms to the expectations surrounding us. It is altogether understandable and so with a sigh and shrug we get on with the routine, do what is pragmatic and fulfill our responsibilities. Often we are not really aware what our true vocation is and should it only come into focus once an alternative course has been set, it takes enormous courage to change tack and begin afresh.
Internet Solutions have a wonderful mantra: Do what you love; love what you do. That about sums it up. How do we create a workplace culture where we have people who can say that? How do we honour our people in such a way that we are constantly encouraging them to explore and find their vocation, even if that means they have to leave? We should never look to our work as the source of meaning; rather we bring meaning to that which we do. Finding meaning is our responsibility and understanding. It means that authentic meaning and purpose can be found no matter what the task or work.
It is said, rightly so in my opinion, that culture eats strategy for breakfast every day. Part of creating a healthy culture within our work environment is to actively work to link avocation and vocation. It is never easy but it is always possible. It always starts at ‘the top’ given that culture is a leadership responsibility. It starts with an awareness and willingness to intentionally pursue this agenda. It will be nuanced by the context in which you operate and the situation in which you find yourself. It will be influenced and impacted by culture and as such has to be discovered and nurtured rather than dictated and forced. It has to be ‘invited’.
**************
Employers should hire employees who will find their jobs are their avocation not their vocation.
Employees' lack of engagement starts with the CEO.
* CEOs hire the managers.
* Managers hire the employees.
* Employees don’t hire themselves.
When there are disengaged or problem employees we need not look beyond managers and executives.
* Too many employees are in the wrong jobs, i.e., management errors.
* Too many managers are in the wrong jobs, i.e., executive errors.
* Too many executives are in the wrong jobs, i.e., CEO errors.
* Too many managers and executives Reward A hoping for B.
* Poorly behaving employees are tolerated, i.e., management errors.
* Poorly behaving managers are tolerated, i.e., executive errors.
* Poorly behaving executives are tolerated, i.e., CEO errors.
In other words, we get who we hire and who we promote.
Talent means different things to different people.
If a CEO believes that hiring talent means hiring employees, then s/he is doomed to fail at talent acquisition and talent management.
* Before we can manage talent we need to hire talent.
* Before we can hire talent we need to find talent.
* Before we can find talent we need to know what talent looks like.
* Before we can know what talent looks like we need to know how to measure talent.
* Before we can know how to measure talent we need to know how to identify talent.
* Before we can identify talent we need to define talent.
* Before we can define talent we need to ask, "How do I define talent?"
This is not rocket science but few employers know how to do it effectively.
Before HR can manage people they must hire employees.
Interviewees should not have to persuade the employer to hire them but rather the employer needs to persuade the right applicants to accept the job offers. Only the employer can know which applicants will be successful if hired. Since an applicant cannot know if she'll be successful if hired, she must ask questions to learn if the employer knows, but most do not. Applicants need to ask the hiring manager, "How do you know that I will be successful if I am hired?" If the answer is just a review of your resumes, education, experience, and interview performance, then you can be sure they don't know if you'll be successful, in which case be very careful since your job tenure depends on their answer.
* Employees' lack of engagement starts with the CEO.
* CEOs hire the managers.
* Managers hire the employees.
* Employees don’t hire themselves.
When there are disengaged or problem employees we need not look beyond managers and executives.
* Too many employees are in the wrong jobs, i.e., management errors.
* Too many managers are in the wrong jobs, i.e., executive errors.
* Too many executives are in the wrong jobs, i.e., CEO errors.
* Too many managers and executives Reward A hoping for B.
* Poorly behaving employees are tolerated, i.e., management errors.
* Poorly behaving managers are tolerated, i.e., executive errors.
* Poorly behaving executives are tolerated, i.e., CEO errors.
In other words, we get who we hire and who we promote.
Jackie, enjoyed your article. Employee engagement must start before the job offer is made otherwise employee engagement is hard to achieve.
≈ 80% of employees self-report that they are not engaged.
≈ 80% of managers are ill suited to effectively manage people.
* The two 80 percents are closely related.
Employers keep hiring the wrong people to be their managers and then they wonder why they have so few successful, engaged employees. Successful employees have all three of the following success predictors while unsuccessful employees lack one or two and usually it is Job Talent that they lack.
I. Competence
II. Cultural Fit
III. Job Talent
Employers do a…
A. GREAT job of hiring competent employees, about 95%
B. good job of hiring competent employees who fit the culture, about 70%
C. POOR job of hiring competent employees who fit the culture and who have a talent for the job, about 20%
Identifying the talent required for each job seems to be missing from talent and management discussions. If we ignore any of the three criteria, our workforce will be less successful with higher turnover than if we do not ignore any of the three criteria.
I. Competence
II. Cultural Fit
III. Job Talent
There are many factors to consider when hiring and managing talent but first we need to define talent unless "hiring talent" means "hiring employees." Everyone wants to hire for and manage talent but if we can't answer the five questions below with specificity, we can't hire or manage talent effectively.
A. How do we define talent?
B. How do we measure talent?
C. How do we know a candidate’s talent?
D. How do we know what talent is required for each job?
E. How do we match a candidate’s talent to the talent demanded by the job?
Most managers cannot answer the five questions with specificity but the answers provide the framework for hiring successful employees and creating an engaged workforce.
Talent is not found in resumes or interviews or background checks or college transcripts.
Talent must be hired since it cannot be acquired or imparted after the hire.
My answers
It is all well and good to encourage everyone to study STEM. However, job success relies on more than education alone.
Most all new hires are motivated so why do so many new employees seem to lose their motivation over time?
1. Competence, without it job success is unlikely.
2. Cultural Fit, without it successful working relationships are difficult to build and maintain.
3. Job Talent, without it lasting job success is unlikely at best.
Most employers do not address Job Talent.
Sally, you have it right. We measure the following 20 items without asking animal or crazy questions.
1. Thinking Styles (5 scales)
- Learning Index
- Verbal Skill
- Verbal Reasoning
- Numerical Ability
- Numeric Reasoning
2. Behavioral Traits (9 scales)
- Energy Level
- Assertiveness
- Sociability
- Manageability
- Attitude
- Decisiveness
- Accommodating
- Independence
- Objective Judgment
3. Occupational Interests (6 scales)
- Enterprising
- Financial/Administrative
- People Service
- Technical
- Mechanical
- Creative
Thanks again,
Bob
Hi Sally, how do we identify and measure job strengths?
Mark, thanks for an insightful article.
Empowering a workforce is easy to do; have all executives, managers, and supervisors do their jobs well all of the time. The hard part is getting the executives to do their jobs well, the next hardest part is getting managers to do their jobs well, followed by supervisors doing their jobs well. Employees will be doing their jobs well if everyone above them is doing their jobs well. Look out, employee engagement is about to take hold. Some employers want to skip the executives, managers and supervisor parts and go right to the employees, but that is not how employees get engaged.
The reason employee engagement starts before the job offer is made is that we need to hire employees for their internal motivation.
As they say, "Everything that’s controllable has a person connected to it," and when discussing employee problems that person is a manager or an executive or the CEO.
Internal motivation, unlike external motivation, is not under the control of the employer. Managers who know this don't make the mistake of presuming that they can change employees' internal motivation.
When there are disengaged or problem employees we need not look beyond managers and executives.
- Too many employees are in the wrong jobs, i.e., management errors.
- Too many managers are in the wrong jobs, i.e., executive errors.
- Too many executives are in the wrong jobs, i.e., CEO errors.
- Too many managers and executives Reward A hoping for B.
- Poorly behaving employees are tolerated, i.e., management errors.
- Poorly behaving managers are tolerated, i.e., executive errors.
- Poorly behaving executives are tolerated, i.e., CEO errors.
- In other words, we get who we hire and who we promote.
If we want to break the cycle, then begin hiring the right people for all positions.
We need to hire employees for their behaviors not just their competence and cultural fit. The best candidates, i.e., the most sought after candidates, may or may not be a good hire.
• Competence is the King of job performance.
• Talent is the Queen of job performance.
• Potential is the Prince of job performance.
• Education is the Princess of job performance.
• Experience is the Court Jester of job performance.
Competence and Talent rule job performance.
There are many factors to consider when hiring talent but first we need to define talent unless "hiring talent" means "hiring employees."
Everyone wants to hire for talent but if we can't answer the five questions below with specificity, we can't hire for talent.
1. How do we define talent?
2. How do we measure talent?
3. How do we know a candidate’s talent?
4. How do we know what talent is required for each job?
5. How do we match a candidate’s talent to the talent demanded by the job?
Employers need to assess for:
- Cultural Match (Cultural Fit)
- Skills Match (Competence)
- Job Match (Talent)
Some employers assess for all three.
Employees' lack of engagement starts with the CEO.
CEOs hire the managers.
Managers hire the employees.
Employees don’t hire themselves.
When there are disengaged or problem employees we need not look beyond managers and executives.
* Too many employees are in the wrong jobs, i.e., management errors.
* Too many managers are in the wrong jobs, i.e., executive errors.
* Too many executives are in the wrong jobs, i.e., CEO errors.
* Too many managers and executives Reward A hoping for B.
* Poorly behaving employees are tolerated, i.e., management errors.
* Poorly behaving managers are tolerated, i.e., executive errors.
* Poorly behaving executives are tolerated, i.e., CEO errors.
In other words, we get who we hire and who we promote.
Hello Blaire, great comments, thanks.
Most all new hires are motivated so why do so many new employees seem to lose their motivation over time?
1. Competence, without it job success is unlikely.
2. Cultural Fit, without it successful working relationships are difficult to build and maintain.
3. Job Talent, without it lasting job success is unlikely at best.
Most employers do not address Job Talent.
Leadership is more often than not an avocation but for most leaders it is a vocation.
The following four paragraphs are from, http://www.newworldofwork.co.uk/2012/07/11/your-real-work-as-a-leader-a-...
**************
Avocation can be understood as ‘that which one does’ whilst vocation is something to which one feels called. Vocation sits at an altogether deeper level and when tapped into, provides a source of direction and motivation. For some their vocation is all too apparent whilst for others it is the result of deep exploration and self-awareness. The tragedy is that many go through life preoccupied with a sense of avocation that serves to keep them from their vocation. How often have you heard someone say, “I really wanted to be a teacher (or artist or whatever) but I was compelled to become an accountant”? It speaks of a life lived down a path poorly chosen and is usually filled with regret and sometimes resentment.
Sometimes, of course, it is a whole lot easier to fall into an avocation. It is more convenient, more practical and conforms to the expectations surrounding us. It is altogether understandable and so with a sigh and shrug we get on with the routine, do what is pragmatic and fulfill our responsibilities. Often we are not really aware what our true vocation is and should it only come into focus once an alternative course has been set, it takes enormous courage to change tack and begin afresh.
Internet Solutions have a wonderful mantra: Do what you love; love what you do. That about sums it up. How do we create a workplace culture where we have people who can say that? How do we honour our people in such a way that we are constantly encouraging them to explore and find their vocation, even if that means they have to leave? We should never look to our work as the source of meaning; rather we bring meaning to that which we do. Finding meaning is our responsibility and understanding. It means that authentic meaning and purpose can be found no matter what the task or work.
It is said, rightly so in my opinion, that culture eats strategy for breakfast every day. Part of creating a healthy culture within our work environment is to actively work to link avocation and vocation. It is never easy but it is always possible. It always starts at ‘the top’ given that culture is a leadership responsibility. It starts with an awareness and willingness to intentionally pursue this agenda. It will be nuanced by the context in which you operate and the situation in which you find yourself. It will be influenced and impacted by culture and as such has to be discovered and nurtured rather than dictated and forced. It has to be ‘invited’.
**************
Employers should hire employees who will find their jobs are their avocation not their vocation.
Employees' lack of engagement starts with the CEO.
* CEOs hire the managers.
* Managers hire the employees.
* Employees don’t hire themselves.
When there are disengaged or problem employees we need not look beyond managers and executives.
* Too many employees are in the wrong jobs, i.e., management errors.
* Too many managers are in the wrong jobs, i.e., executive errors.
* Too many executives are in the wrong jobs, i.e., CEO errors.
* Too many managers and executives Reward A hoping for B.
* Poorly behaving employees are tolerated, i.e., management errors.
* Poorly behaving managers are tolerated, i.e., executive errors.
* Poorly behaving executives are tolerated, i.e., CEO errors.
In other words, we get who we hire and who we promote.
Talent means different things to different people.
If a CEO believes that hiring talent means hiring employees, then s/he is doomed to fail at talent acquisition and talent management.
* Before we can manage talent we need to hire talent.
* Before we can hire talent we need to find talent.
* Before we can find talent we need to know what talent looks like.
* Before we can know what talent looks like we need to know how to measure talent.
* Before we can know how to measure talent we need to know how to identify talent.
* Before we can identify talent we need to define talent.
* Before we can define talent we need to ask, "How do I define talent?"
This is not rocket science but few employers know how to do it effectively.
Before HR can manage people they must hire employees.
Interviewees should not have to persuade the employer to hire them but rather the employer needs to persuade the right applicants to accept the job offers. Only the employer can know which applicants will be successful if hired. Since an applicant cannot know if she'll be successful if hired, she must ask questions to learn if the employer knows, but most do not. Applicants need to ask the hiring manager, "How do you know that I will be successful if I am hired?" If the answer is just a review of your resumes, education, experience, and interview performance, then you can be sure they don't know if you'll be successful, in which case be very careful since your job tenure depends on their answer.
* Employees' lack of engagement starts with the CEO.
* CEOs hire the managers.
* Managers hire the employees.
* Employees don’t hire themselves.
When there are disengaged or problem employees we need not look beyond managers and executives.
* Too many employees are in the wrong jobs, i.e., management errors.
* Too many managers are in the wrong jobs, i.e., executive errors.
* Too many executives are in the wrong jobs, i.e., CEO errors.
* Too many managers and executives Reward A hoping for B.
* Poorly behaving employees are tolerated, i.e., management errors.
* Poorly behaving managers are tolerated, i.e., executive errors.
* Poorly behaving executives are tolerated, i.e., CEO errors.
In other words, we get who we hire and who we promote.
Jackie, enjoyed your article. Employee engagement must start before the job offer is made otherwise employee engagement is hard to achieve.
≈ 80% of employees self-report that they are not engaged.
≈ 80% of managers are ill suited to effectively manage people.
* The two 80 percents are closely related.
Employers keep hiring the wrong people to be their managers and then they wonder why they have so few successful, engaged employees. Successful employees have all three of the following success predictors while unsuccessful employees lack one or two and usually it is Job Talent that they lack.
I. Competence
II. Cultural Fit
III. Job Talent
Employers do a…
A. GREAT job of hiring competent employees, about 95%
B. good job of hiring competent employees who fit the culture, about 70%
C. POOR job of hiring competent employees who fit the culture and who have a talent for the job, about 20%
Identifying the talent required for each job seems to be missing from talent and management discussions. If we ignore any of the three criteria, our workforce will be less successful with higher turnover than if we do not ignore any of the three criteria.
I. Competence
II. Cultural Fit
III. Job Talent
There are many factors to consider when hiring and managing talent but first we need to define talent unless "hiring talent" means "hiring employees." Everyone wants to hire for and manage talent but if we can't answer the five questions below with specificity, we can't hire or manage talent effectively.
A. How do we define talent?
B. How do we measure talent?
C. How do we know a candidate’s talent?
D. How do we know what talent is required for each job?
E. How do we match a candidate’s talent to the talent demanded by the job?
Most managers cannot answer the five questions with specificity but the answers provide the framework for hiring successful employees and creating an engaged workforce.
Talent is not found in resumes or interviews or background checks or college transcripts.
Talent must be hired since it cannot be acquired or imparted after the hire.