Five Questions to Help You Determine the Right Path
No leadership competency is more critical than recruiting, assessing and developing current and future leaders. And while decisions regarding how to fill vacancies impact quality of operational management – they also profoundly affect employee engagement and motivation, organizational culture, and ultimately mission success. Failure to carefully choose who fills a vacancy as well as how the vacancy is filled – can profoundly impact the leader’s credibility. Any time a vacancy occurs, it is not just those who are drawn to the prospect of being promoted into the vacancy who have a stake in the process… everyone who could be affected by the ripples of someone receiving the promotion feel a stake in the outcome – especially those who will work for whoever fills the vacancy!
In an ideal world, you would always have a strong pool of internal candidates to choose from but that is not always the case… and determining whether to simply promote from within or to open up an external recruitment process can be challenging.
Do We Have an Adequate Pool to Promote from Within?
The following questions will assist the leader in evaluating whether to promote from within, or to conduct an external recruitment.
- Do you have internal prospects with the essential technical qualifications to do the job? Too many organizations confuse essential and ideal, and as a result miss out on promoting exceptional candidates.
- Do those internal prospects who meet the essential technical qualifications have a track record of success in their current position? Some people make success happen and others are along for the ride. Know the difference.
- Have those internal prospects, who meet the technical qualifications and have a track record of success, completed leadership development programs to prepare themselves for promotion? Look for employees who are investing in their own growth even if internal development programs are not offered.
- Do those internal prospects, who meet the technical qualifications, have a track record of success and have they completed preparatory leadership programs while maintaining a reputation for a positive attitude and great teamwork among their current employees, peers and supervisors? Unpleasant people who are promoted become unpleasant bosses.
- Are those internal prospects who meet all of the above standards philosophically aligned with the organization’s stated mission, vision and values and do they have a reputation for walking the talk? Nothing damages credibility more than “do as I say not as I do” leadership.
These questions form a bit of a funnel, moving from the easiest criteria for evaluation, to the more challenging (but still critical). Proceeding through each of the five questions, it is likely the number of prospects still considered viable diminishes. In an ideal situation, you can answer all five questions affirmatively for at least three prospects. If so, an internal recruitment process only should be adequate. However, still opening up the process organization wide ensures everyone has a fair opportunity to compete, and that someone who has great potential has not gone unnoticed.
Remember, these questions are not designed to determine who to hire… they merely help determine whether adequate options exist internally to avoid an external recruitment process. Hiring decisions are almost always much better if options are available to contrast and compare to.
If you cannot answer in the affirmative on all five questions for at least three internal prospects, it is likely that an external recruitment process is appropriate.
Published July 2015 in Public Sector Digest
Last week, in Ditching the Dissonance II, we discussed rabid, info-seeking wolves and thoughtful, information-foraging caribou, considered how confirmation bias can influence our information seeking habits, and how bad information causes breakdowns in communication. Today, we will look at information seeking strategies that will help you get in touch with your inner evidence-based-information-seeking caribou.
As you read last week’s blog, did you consider which category of information seeker you fall into: wolf or caribou? Do you do diligent research and consider even the information that doesn’t support your hypothesis? Or do you seek only the evidence that confirms your views…and are you so in denial that you are a poor researcher that you decided to just disregard all the information in the blog that supported this conclusion?
“I really want to be an evidence-based-information-seeking caribou!” I hear you say, “But how???”
If you found yourself in the latter category and weren’t in denial about it, you may have been greatly disappointed with this state of affairs, but never fear—caribou status is within your reach.
The first step is to think about how you typically seek out information. Determine where your weak spots are. Are you a lazy researcher who takes frequent shortcuts to avoid sifting through large amounts of information? Are you afraid to find information that will force you to reevaluate your opinions? Have you ever stepped foot inside a library? Have you ever found yourself utilizing Boolean operators in a bibliographic database search? Now, you may be thinking at this point: Who are you and why are you asking me complicated questions that I don’t want to answer??? But you need to answer these questions before you can achieve caribou status. Consider where you are as a researcher and where you can improve your skill set if you want to be a better information seeker.
The second step is to determine your information needs. This may mean admitting to yourself that there is a gap in knowledge or understanding of an idea, concept, or phenomenon that you are looking to fill (I.e., admit that you don’t know everything). This will likely require examining your own motives. Determine what you need to know, and why, and look for the best answer. In other words, don’t Google what you are convinced is the only possible answer to the question or seek out only the information that confirms your stance on an issue. This leads to confirmation bias. The information Google will give to you will likely confirm your opinion (no matter how far-fetched), but it may be grossly inaccurate. Recall those instructions that your English teacher gave you when you had to write an expository essay in high school: start with a good question and work toward an answer based on reliable sources.
The third step: choose your sources wisely. The information need will determine the sources you use. Though they are easy to access, Google, Wikipedia, and the like are not the best sources for many types of information. However, I will be the first to admit that I use them. When I wake up at 2 in the morning desperately trying to remember who directed the movie Paris, Texas (it was Wim Wenders!!!), Google provides a quick resolution to this dilemma. Google and Wikipedia can, at times, be a good starting place for finding resources (those “References” sections can be useful). But if I want to understand the conceptual underpinnings of string theory I’m not going to rely on a Wikipedia article or the random blog posts churned up by a Google search—I’m going to look for information compiled by experts in the field.
For some subjects, you need an expert. Not everyone on the Internet is an expert but anyone on the Internet can claim to be an expert. Depending on your information needs, you may need to seek out information in peer-reviewed journals. Don’t be afraid to wade into scholarly waters if your information need necessitates it. If you feel that your information need is basic enough that you can trust Google to answer it, you should still apply certain criteria to your search results. Check the credentials of the content creator, review their other work (if available), the date of the material, and look for retractions.
One of the most important but often overlooked steps in the information seeking process is evaluating the results and, if you’ve been following the previous steps, it should make your job easier. To evaluate your results for validity and relevance, ask the following questions: Do they help you answer (or at least work toward an answer) to your question? Do they meet your information needs? Are they the best results you could get under the circumstances? Is the information they provide useful, reliable, up-to-date, and unbiased? If you don’t feel comfortable with the answers to these questions, it may be time to move on to the secret 5th step: repeat the process if you aren’t satisfied with your results.
How you choose to interpret the information you find on an information foraging expedition and how you use what you find is up to you but, at the very least, always try to be open to new information you find along the way, not just the stuff that confirms a previously held opinion. While this is helpful advice for any information seeker, it is vital for anyone in a position of authority in the public or private sector, or any position where the information you disseminate will have a far reach, because of the amount of influence you wield. Any bad information you provide will travel far. Learn to recognize confirmation bias and avoid it before it leads you to spread bad information. Continually hone your information seeking skills and improve your information seeking strategy. Learn the ways of the diligent, evidence-based-information-seeking caribou!
And for my fellow Pixies fans, this…