The Right Team
As President elect Obama goes through the next few weeks he will have both the opportunity and the responsibility to do something very few of us ever get a chance to do- individually select the members of his "executive team" or cabinet.
I have had the opportunity to serve as an executive with several different organizations. With the exception of my own business, I have never had the opportunity to assemble my own "team" with a blank slate to start with. That is not to say that I have not hired new team members or everyone that I "inherited" was not a good fit or a keeper, still the prospect of making each decision is an intriguing one.
My colleague, Joseph Skursky, specializes in helping his clients select the right people. He calls his model- "Hire hard- Manage easy". The intent is clear. Think about not only the "technical" aspects of what you want in your team mates, but their values, commitment, and other attributes.
Matt "Boom" Daniel talks about his experiences as a Marine Corp aviator, and the importance of having each others "six" or looking out for each other and how important that is especially in combat situations.
In my previous blogs, monologues, and presentations I have talked about some other things that I think are cogent to this discussion. Specifically I would include the role of a leader in providing clarity and eliminating ambiguity and the concept that leadership is a gift from those who freely elect to follow your direction and "join up" with you to achieve commonly understood and accepted goals. That is the essence of Compliance to Commitment.
Some of the most interesting dialogue around President Obama's selections is his past relationship with some of his key appointments. Whether they have personal animus or "like" each other or not. He seems to be approaching his selections in a very pragmatic way- the qualifications of the person to do the job, and their commitment to the vision.
Sounds like the way a good executive would make those key decisions.
Many people I have talked to indicated a key decision point for them in deciding who to vote for in the presidential election was Senator McCain's selection of Governor Palin as his running mate. Some felt her so unqualified as to bring his judgement into question, others felt the decision was a concession to political constituencies whose values and positions they found unacceptable.
Do I think Senator McCain lost the election because of Governor Palin, no, but she was definitely a polarizing choice.
At the end of the day I hold leaders accountable for their choices of their "team". They either selected them, or chose to retain them. Either way the leader who complains about their "team" isn't much of a leader to me. Who is on our team is our responsibility.
I have had the opportunity to serve as an executive with several different organizations. With the exception of my own business, I have never had the opportunity to assemble my own "team" with a blank slate to start with. That is not to say that I have not hired new team members or everyone that I "inherited" was not a good fit or a keeper, still the prospect of making each decision is an intriguing one.
My colleague, Joseph Skursky, specializes in helping his clients select the right people. He calls his model- "Hire hard- Manage easy". The intent is clear. Think about not only the "technical" aspects of what you want in your team mates, but their values, commitment, and other attributes.
Matt "Boom" Daniel talks about his experiences as a Marine Corp aviator, and the importance of having each others "six" or looking out for each other and how important that is especially in combat situations.
In my previous blogs, monologues, and presentations I have talked about some other things that I think are cogent to this discussion. Specifically I would include the role of a leader in providing clarity and eliminating ambiguity and the concept that leadership is a gift from those who freely elect to follow your direction and "join up" with you to achieve commonly understood and accepted goals. That is the essence of Compliance to Commitment.
Some of the most interesting dialogue around President Obama's selections is his past relationship with some of his key appointments. Whether they have personal animus or "like" each other or not. He seems to be approaching his selections in a very pragmatic way- the qualifications of the person to do the job, and their commitment to the vision.
Sounds like the way a good executive would make those key decisions.
Many people I have talked to indicated a key decision point for them in deciding who to vote for in the presidential election was Senator McCain's selection of Governor Palin as his running mate. Some felt her so unqualified as to bring his judgement into question, others felt the decision was a concession to political constituencies whose values and positions they found unacceptable.
Do I think Senator McCain lost the election because of Governor Palin, no, but she was definitely a polarizing choice.
At the end of the day I hold leaders accountable for their choices of their "team". They either selected them, or chose to retain them. Either way the leader who complains about their "team" isn't much of a leader to me. Who is on our team is our responsibility.
Labels: hiring, Leadership, recruitment, selection, teams

1 Comments:
The right post.
With the right attitude you can get the technical knowledge you seek. With the best technical knowledge around an issue, you can't get the right attitude regarding commitment, respect or flexibility.
regards
ricardo
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home