You did it. That widget you’ve been working on for two years in your basement is finally ready for the market. And, now, now, you’ve got to build a team to do that. Who do you hire? For what do you look?
There are many approaches. You can use the Silicon Valley approach (SVA), one that sounds fantastic in theory, but I’m not sure works for most of us. The SVA believes one can only hire the A+ people. Because an A+ person will work miracles, will run circles around those B and C people, can work 30 hour days without missing a beat.
I am not going to disagree with that concept. But, I will temper it. Most of us don’t have the luxury of a $ 250 million, or even a $ 50 million venture endowment. Most of us don’t have the cachet necessary to have folks banging down our doors to be hired. And, to be honest, you really don’t know – unless you’ve know the person for a while- how “true-to-life” those paper credentials can be to real life performance.
Let me give you an example. When I was dating (you know, that thing you do after you get divorced, trying to meet new people), I engaged in the electron match game. I could decide which folks could provide enough to have me want to try a second time. But, that usually took more than a few eMails back and forth. And, to be honest, I much preferred to engage with those willing to use the chat features. Why? Because anyone can use spell check on their eMails and/or have Cyrano helping them respond. But, real life chat- that required someone with a quick brain that could communicate- or not.
And, you’ll notice that I said I was looking to meet people with whom I could engage at least twice. Because I still wouldn’t know much about them- or them about me. It’s the same when you interview people. Oh, sure, you could use the SVA approach, and engage in four or five interviews (I’m not sure I’m against that at all), require the prospect to submit to a variety of tests (I know I probably would not be willing to participate in this activity myself), but, realistically, most of us start-ups don’t have that financial luxury.
And, another lesson I learned. When I was going to MIT, it had a philosophy of hiring the best professors it could. Which meant, to a large degree, that it had to hire their own graduates. After all, if they didn’t go to MIT, how could they possible be the best? The problem with that thinking- as MIT found out- is that one becomes extremely insular. And, misses things- big things- that didn’t get considered there. (Imagine if your company never considered any other companies’ ideas valid. Who would you blame when you are blindsided by that next big thing?)
Moreover, I have found that great companies and great teams don’t require everyone to be great individually. Instead, they all have to work great together. (OK, you know the name of our company is Adjuvancy- an agency that works to make all the components- people, finance, operations- work better together.)
Too often, we have a list of attributes we expect our best employees to have. That really have no bearing on how they help the company achieve greatness. More often, those choices occur when we replace someone who has left. (You know, someone just like Karen, except she smiles more often. Someone who could think on his feet like David, but can also train new employees.)
Instead, for each position you have in mind, you should discern the one key attribute you need. Obviously, the key attribute for your financial officer is going to be different than that for your production manager. And, maybe add to it the key attribute you DON’T have. To round out your team. That choice should be the best and the brightest you can afford for that one position. Oh- and attitude- that ‘can do’ attitude- that’s always required.
Because if you have a rounded out team- and YOU do your job of providing vision and mission, you will have the best chance for success possible. 
In my own company, I do have the best and the brightest 😉 ME …. OK, maybe not the best choice for some of the roles, but for now I get by.
kajfkljafsdk;ldafs
It took me that long to stop laughing and get control of my keyboard, PeggyLee…
Oh Roy, are you seeing anybody? Because, you can’t interview a date like you would interview someone you are looking to hire in your company. We need to talk. lol
shawn recently posted..Tales of Detox from a Diabetic
Oh, yes, I can, Shawn- and did. I can ask (and did) questions about events, music, politics, etc. And, if their reply is (was) clearly in left field, then i’ll leave them there (too many to play ball, too)…
How can you really know what kind of person you are going to get? Degrees, good remarks by previous bosses (who might say anything to get rid of this person), good acting, good grief. Do you ever use a gut instinct? Or use two or three month trials? What if you are not sure what you are looking for in terms of the key attribute? Maybe that’s why I work by myself. Thanks for getting me to think, Roy.
Ann:
There are many ways to so determine. We have real problems, as you so indicated, with references from previous employers. We do speak with peers of the person. We use informal networks. We read their professional papers. We ask them to present a short seminar- with questions and answers.
We try to minimize the reliance on gut instinct- but that does not mean it does not play any part.
Bring on the Ivory Tower, MIT!
David Leonhardt recently posted..Google’s Penguin Update…
Thanks for that laugh, David…
I’m not sure that hiring everyone from MIT is any smarter (or better) than hiring only professors from MIT!
Somewhere in the past one of us posted a similar theme and the fact remains that even the super hires have one thing very important – a great attitude. I know coming from an education background that often times, especially today people get through a course and get the qualification because the school needs the “numbers”. And education – where are the innovative, creative thinkers – they got out of education because the compliance and rote stuff bored them to tears or total frustration. I have tried for Masters degrees and fired 3 schools for incompetence. Every time I check one out…I run a mile when I really talk to the professors so finding great people is interviewing for purpose, passion and performance.
Roberta Budvietas, recently posted..When No is a Positive Word
Love those additions, Roberta!
Yes, the attitude is critical. And, that is the item I was trying to convey to Ann with her queries. It’s something we can detect if we ask the right questions and try the right situations.
Thanks!
As the saying goes, there is no I in Team. You make some really good points Roy. How boring and how counter productive would it be to have ‘clones’ or everyone be exactly like you, think like you and even work like you.
I believe a good team brings many personalities, backgrounds and beliefs together to inspire creativity, productivity and success. I remember the interview days while working for the bank’s mortgage department. I always wanted to talk to the person on the phone first, then read their resume and then have a face to face interview. Today for my company, I am able to ‘check out’ individuals by searching online and checking their social sites. Feels different, but it really is a great tool!
Lynn Brown recently posted..Best 4 Blogging Tips for Small Business Owners
Great idea in that second paragraph, Lynn!
Thanks for the addition.
Roy…As I who worked with an SVA firm, I can tell you first hand that even with the A+ people, there is no guarantee you will succeed. The leader at the top needs to be someone who can ascertain the talent and if they fail, the whole ship sinks. I like you approach, it’s honest. You need a team that brings their unique talents to the table and you as the leader need to piece together how that team will work with their talents to bring the vision to life. Simple, really. It takes someone with the ability to see the vision and how to plan to pull it together.
Jen:
That last sentence is the absolute key- and a gem of a thought! Thanks for sharing that.
roy
I found your comments about checking out potential romantic partners to be very interesting. I am a very auditory person and I love to communicate with people who are good speakers and writers. I think that a pen-pal relationship is a great way to really get to know a person.
However, my husband (my real soul mate) is a man of actions instead of whispering sweet words into my ear or writing long, sentimental love letters. I sometimes get frustrated because he doesn’t talk to me enough, but his actions have alway demonstrated his love and devotion to me. So, actions speak louder than words…there is no contest.
Janette Fuller recently posted..Book Review: Worth Every Penny
Ah, Janette.
I’m with you- love doth not words need. But, to determine compatibility, to determine if interests match, then words are paramount. Once we find things in common- or in conflict- that we can enjoy and share together, the concept of love can be afforded an opportunity. However, I don’t see the viability of a loving relationship that has no underlying commonalities.
I know that I can love someone but have no desire to spend periods of time with them. That’s why one gets divorced! (Oh, I know that some claim they don’t love each other anymore- but that is usually related to the fact that commonalities no longer portend or that the tender moments you mention no longer are provided, etc.)
Roy
Great inside info about MIT. 🙂 It’s so important to avoid being short-sighted and biased. Some of the best talent out there goes unnoticed because they haven’t done anything spectacular yet, but the best is yet to come.
I’ve taken chances on different sub-contractors and for the most part, I’ve been happy with my choice. It’s all about being focused on what you want, need and are willing to put up with.
As always, interesting insight, Roy!
Lisa Kanarek recently posted..Take the Time to Purge Your Home Office
Lisa-
I don’t think we have to put up with anything. We have to find folks who complement our strengths and have the right attitude!
Always fascinating, Roy. Ties so nicely with your previous posts about leadership. Ever observed what happens with A+ people (or B, C or D people) when leadership changes? Sometimes B or C people start resembling A+ people or *gasp* A+ people slip a notch. And what happens to A+ people who aren’t A+ people all the time? Do we ship them out for a new batch? 🙂
Cathy Miller recently posted..10 Sizzling Blog Post Ideas for Summer
That’s why I suggest building a team, Cathy. Each of us react to circumstance and associates differently. Finding the right adjuvant (come on, that was a soft lob you gave me) makes the difference.
Thanks for your comments AND observations to amplify the post.
Really does simplify things…looking one one attribute…even in vendors or others support services we hire out. And love the building the team approach. Identifying people’s willingness to change and grow is, I feel, a very important quality in love, work and life. If there isn’t some flexibility and some openness to experimenting with new approaches, evolving together then it seems eventually the interaction would atrophy.
Tambre Leighn/coaching by tambre recently posted..The “S” Word
Thanks so much for that augmentation to the discussion, Tambre!
It’s the team that helps bring the vision to life.
Roy
An interesting analogy you present hiring vs dating. I wonder that we shouldn’t look more wholey at the reverse concept too…looking at dating as an interview of sort. Objectivity comes into play in a few of your points. I have to say I was intrigued by your notion of looking for one main key attribute for each position. While I think it’s brilliant I’m not sure one would suffice. Simply because if you are integrating a team you want to actually work well you also need personality attributes, work ethics etc to fit also.
Still…it’s never easy to see beyond the paper credentials as you call them. I think this is why so many companies have 2+ interviews with different people these days. Trying to flesh out the person, not just the skill.
Bonnie recently posted..3 Easy Steps to Not Doing Something Stupid
Bonnie:
I always thought having more than two current staff interview folks was to determine if the personal chemistry could extend to the team. Which is why we employ such techniques.
Roy