Arun, who held a leadership position in Cups and Saucers Inc. announced his resignation one not so fine morning. Arun was joining C&S’ biggest competitor. Swami, the business head lost no time in scouting for talent and he soon identified Atul as the right candidate. Swami meticulously planned Atul’s induction while ensuring the transition of responsibilities from Arun to Atul was smooth and seamless. The induction, job related training, and organizational orientation were all diligently completed and the entire process was concluded with a spirited team building event, where Atul had an opportunity to build rapport and bond with the rest of the team.
The stage was thus set for Atul to take charge of his role and responsibilities. The initial few weeks rolled by and Atul was not visibly making progress. That he was struggling was apparent as he missed deadlines, committed errors and overall seemed quite clueless about the business and the operations. Swami stepped in to hand hold and help Atul; he left no stone unturned in ensuring he had all possible guidance. Atul improved marginally but this was clearly not adequate. He needed to step up and take control as business and team were both slipping. Now Swami was clueless! What was happening here? Was Atul just not right for the job?
In my mind, a consistent inability to deliver an agreed set of goals despite having the right skills, resources and environment to perform is non- performance.
Non-performance has been a common issue in most organizations. Is it due to attitude, aptitude, inadequate skills or low motivation? There is never a single reason for non-performance; however, job fitment could be a primary cause. Like the adage goes, `different courses for different horses’, one may be very capable but may not fit into the role where the skill requirements could be different from the existing skills of the individual. This skill gap is more often than not ignored till issues reach a point of no return.
But how is this dealt with? One way is to validate fitment while hiring. We hire based on past performance (as depicted in the candidate profile) as this is the only indicator for future performance. Despite such careful measures many a hiring goes wrong. The first three months in a person’s new job is most critical for the candidate and the company.
Let’s now go back to Atul.
In the case of Atul, Swami needs take cognizance of the fact that he was hired for a specific role, based upon his skills and experience. While Swami enabled his acclimatization with the business and the organization, Atul on his part had put in his best efforts. Notwithstanding, the situation was what it was. Atul realized this was a no-go for reasons unknown and he resorted to the obvious step ahead. He put down his papers. Looking at the case objectively, clearly Atul was not right for the role. Perhaps he could have been an efficient manager, but not a good leader.
Hiring mistakes are made more often than one cares to admit. When the fitment to role does not meet expectations, organizations make matters worse by trying the candidate for different roles based on open positions. Such perfunctory actions tend to disrupt an optimal resource situation and could have negative implications both on the company as well as co-workers.
Interviewing is just one of the selection techniques. Skill assessment is equally important that can be gauged with a psychometric tool or in-basket exercises. Whatever maybe the choice of method, it is imperative that a comprehensive assessment of skills be carried out prior to making the offer. Thereafter, a consultative process should be conducted to assess the willingness of the individual to take on the new challenge. Once accepted, it is a good practice to jointly develop a training plan that will equip the incumbent with skills and competencies that are relevant to the new role.
It is said that there are no bad performers. There are only performers who could be bad, in other words unfit, for the said role. The crux of the non-performance issue lies in identifying the gap in fitment, and seeking measures to address the same. And if the measures yet do not achieve the desired results, the sooner a decision is taken the better for both the individual and the institution.
When in dilemma about which way to go with a non-performer, it will help to recall Abraham Lincoln’s words: “By general law, life and limb must be protected; yet often a limb must be amputated to save a life; but a life is never wisely given to save a limb.”
No Comments