Comments on: Discussing Employee Promotability https://cruciallearning.com/blog/discussing-employee-promotability/ VitalSmarts is now Crucial Learning Fri, 16 Sep 2022 15:48:09 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.2 By: Mike Koselek https://cruciallearning.com/blog/discussing-employee-promotability/#comment-4620 Wed, 12 Apr 2017 21:36:12 +0000 http://www.crucialskills.com/?p=6191#comment-4620 Some candidates just aren’t ready. They have not the requisite skills nor experience for a leadership role and don’t or won’t admit this to be true as to why they were not selected. These individuals won’t be satisfied or placated with any response to their inquiries. So saying, I have struggled with Emily’s response for over a year before I could articulate my own response. As a leader in our organization, I have on many occasions wondered about some of the choices made by many of the managers when they had selected a person for a new role: particularly when it comes to a choice for a leadership role, then I have really struggled. On a good number of occasions I have challenged the manager on his/her choice and was not really satisfied with the answer. I decided to review past selections made by all managers relative to the individuals selected for leadership roles. I only tried this test on internal postings because often external resumes appear to be better qualified than the candidate it represents. While my process is not worthy of a PHD dissertation, and the data is more subjective than empirical, still the conclusion I arrived at is interesting. In having the managers review past resumes from internal candidates for positions they had filled, and them rate choose the top 3 resumes from the pile, when the names on the resumes were removed, I observed 8 out of 10 choices would have been different! Of the 30 positions in question, 9 “chosen ones” were not even in their top 3 choices (in one manager’s case this held true for all 3 of his choices). Therefore 30% of selected candidates, based on their resume alone, would have been a 4th or lesser choice and yet got the job and the best candidate was not selected. The selection process also includes the interview and yes, some folks interview better than others. Still, let’s assume all applicants had the requisite skills, time on the job and were reasonably equal performers and capable of surviving an interview, “Why did the lesser qualified person, as determined by the resume review, get the job?” In looking at the manager and the person selected, I wondered if it had more to do with style than skill difference. I conducted an informal test with a workplace style test off the internet and it suggested the manager and the successful candidate shared similar work styles. This makes sense: birds of a feather flock together. If all candidates are basically equal, the manager chose someone who thinks and acts more like they did. Based on this very informal, unscientific and very small sample set, it appears to me there may be something to the “pet” advancement theory. While I don’t think it is so much that managers have a “pet” person and it being fair to that person, it is more that managers see a specific individual that most aligns with their own style and so often this individual gets the “pet” label by his/her peers. And while I understand the managers wanting harmony and continuity in management and a consistent message being delivered to the troops, this “style” selection process prevents diversity and new ideas from entering into management, a kind of inbreeding if you will. It is the old adage of “If you always do what you’ve always done, then you will always get what you always got.” and that is not good for any business in such dynamic times. I like the idea of diversity and new opinions and perspectives on trends in the market and having my ideas being challenged and so it pains me to see good people struggling with their lack of ability to advance and better my business because of their style. When approached by unsuccessful candidates seeking some understanding why they were not selected, I am left with 4 choices to offer “Stay and hope for a change in senior leadership’s views on diversity and the company’s future, or look for a leader within the company with your style and then transfer, or quit here and go to another company where a leader is with your style and then you will get promoted, or accept you will never get into leadership under this current administration and try to be happy with my honesty.” I hate seeing good people not being treated with the true courtesy and respect they deserve. Since reading Emily’s response it has really become apparent to me why ERA and work place diversity issues have become so prevalent in the news and election debates and why the “old boys club” is such a common phrase. I am starting to influence my people to consider a different opinion when selecting people.
I think if HR folks would conduct a similar study within their own organizations they might find out, like me, that there is some truth to the questioning done by many of those who did not get the opportunity to be promoted. And maybe we, as leaders, need to be more open and honest with our people rather than looking for excuses to offer about how close they were or if they only had… or you’re not ready now but keep going because it will happen someday. Yes, my style and my leader’s are quite similar.
Mike

]]> By: Phil Nimtz https://cruciallearning.com/blog/discussing-employee-promotability/#comment-4619 Mon, 21 Mar 2016 21:05:45 +0000 http://www.crucialskills.com/?p=6191#comment-4619 In reply to Anthony.

I agree with Anthony and yet also feel compelled to add that we all also carry a number of unconscious biases about what kind of people we like, feel comfortable with, think look/act like leaders, etc. So there is a very real possibility that unconscious favoritism is sneaking into our judgment calls about personality and other qualifications decisions.

Hopefully these decisions are discussed and include at least one person who is very different form ourselves.

]]> By: Anthony https://cruciallearning.com/blog/discussing-employee-promotability/#comment-4618 Fri, 18 Mar 2016 19:24:23 +0000 http://www.crucialskills.com/?p=6191#comment-4618 I agree with Phil, nicely said Emily.

On the favorites side of the question, ….I think sometimes that perception of “favorites” getting promotions over others who may be as or more qualified comes down to what type of personality the hiring manager thinks would best fit in and work well with the team, rather than just showing favoritism. Is it possible that favorites get hired over more qualified people? Yes, but sometimes how someone works with others can override qualifications, …as well as someone more eager to learn and/or easier to train to the position, or….. there are a lot of decisions that go into the hiring process.

]]> By: Terry Faulkner https://cruciallearning.com/blog/discussing-employee-promotability/#comment-4617 Thu, 17 Mar 2016 18:00:47 +0000 http://www.crucialskills.com/?p=6191#comment-4617 As a manager who faced many of these situations, I find this guidance spot on and very helpful. Thanks for the great leadership here.

]]> By: Julinda https://cruciallearning.com/blog/discussing-employee-promotability/#comment-4616 Wed, 16 Mar 2016 20:32:30 +0000 http://www.crucialskills.com/?p=6191#comment-4616 In my experience, “favorites” actually DO often get a position or promotion over others who are as qualified or more qualified. It’s not just a perception, it’s a reality that a crucial conversation will not change.

]]> By: Kellie Snider https://cruciallearning.com/blog/discussing-employee-promotability/#comment-4615 Wed, 16 Mar 2016 20:10:22 +0000 http://www.crucialskills.com/?p=6191#comment-4615 THANK YOU! This came at just the right moment for me and one of my employees. She’s having some difficulties with a supervisor in another department but each time I get a complaint and follow up on it, it appears that there was just a misunderstanding, or sometimes an alternative explanation that is more plausible, not any intentional action on the part of that supervisor. This approach should help me coach my employee on how to approach this person and how to create effective communication with him.

]]> By: Dr. Patricia Pitsel https://cruciallearning.com/blog/discussing-employee-promotability/#comment-4614 Wed, 16 Mar 2016 15:31:24 +0000 http://www.crucialskills.com/?p=6191#comment-4614 The nature of a hierarchy is such that there are never sufficient promotions for everyone. The more you progress, the fewer positions are available. This can create a situation where in the light of increased narcissism among younger people (according to recent research) you may have more and more young people believing that they have been hard done by when they did not get their expected promotion. They belong to a generation where everyone is a winner, and everyone gets a participation medal.

Personally, I don’t believe it is the job of an HR Manager (particularly in a large government office) to explain to an employee why s/he didn’t get a specific promotion unless the employee is filing a discrimination complaint (which is not the case in this situation). It may be the job of the HR Manager to coach the employee’s manager but I don’t agree that the HR person should be coaching individual employees.

]]> By: Phil Nimtz https://cruciallearning.com/blog/discussing-employee-promotability/#comment-4613 Wed, 16 Mar 2016 13:17:51 +0000 http://www.crucialskills.com/?p=6191#comment-4613 Nicely said Emily. How do I as a ‘helper’ get my own emotions and story under control so I don’t add to the problem. This approach helps us avoid the conflagration of two different sets of feelings. My strong emotions as an HR professional about how they might react and my ability to manage it are very different from the ‘strong emotions’ they are bringing to the discussion. If I can’t separate them and shift, it is likely that this individual will “make up a story” that my nervousness and emotions are about them and their situation rather than about me. This will, of course go a long way to confirming their existing story. It might even be worth mentioning your personal concerns to this individual as a way of modeling openness and vulnerability and enrolling their help in separating the two sets of feelings. Now that would be a nice full pool of shared meaning.

]]>