It will come as little surprise to many employees to be told that managers are often obsessed with correcting what’s wrong with processes, systems and in particular people. I’ve just spent time talking with a group of managers about strengths and weaknesses.

Identifying people’s weaknesses a priority
Many companies put systems in place to identify people’s weaknesses, weaknesses in the sales process and so on in the belief that if management can identify the weaknesses and remove them then the result will be to end up with “strengths”.

The problem with this process is that it assumes that strengths can be ignored because they will remain constant. But this just isn’t true. I often get asked to solve a problem of good talent leaving a company. One of the first questions I ask is, “Why do people join and stay in the business?”.

Blinded by weaknesses
I’ve found that most senior “new hires” are greeted like saviours and are seen as ideal fits into the organisation. In time, too often, this opinion changes. Now I can hear loads of people say that if you point out weaknesses and then fix them that everything will be all right. But could this be missing an opportunity to concentrate on strengths so that they become greater. Time spent on just improving minor weaknesses doesn’t leave much time to increase strengths.

A few weeks ago someone sent out a very informative newsletter with a couple of minor spelling errors. When I visited a business the small errors were pointed out to me by a manager. When I asked what they thought of the content I was told that they had only noticed the mistakes. Later on that day the same individual was complaining that her boss “only ever found fault” in her work.

Some weeks ago I was speaking to a group of Directors about to undertake interviews for a senior sales position within their business. They had collected a great list of candidates to interview.

Don’t lose the ideal candidate to the competition
After reviewing the characteristics of the ideal candidate they were looking for, the competencies that were needed to meet the job and the results expected I asked, “And what questions do you expect to be asked by the candidates and how have you planned to respond”.

I was met with a stony silence. The interviewers considered that they were in a prime position as having a job to offer with jobs being so difficult to find. That was until I observed that they might be upset if they found the ideal candidate, who then chose to join their competitor’s business because they did a better job at “selling” the attractions of working for their firm, it’s career path, benefits and culture to their ideal candidate.

To help I shared the video on the questions a candidate should ask the interviewer that we made a few month ago and it’s shared here. There followed a review of the information being given to the candidates to make the company more attractive to the “ideal candidate” they hoped to attract to them.

“This firm sounded much more attractive”
Yesterday, I heard that their ideal candidate had confessed to his new boss that he had been interviewed by their competitor and had been offered a similar job. The reason for not taking the competitor’s offer was “because this firm sounded so much more attractive to work for”.

Questions you should ask the interviewer

I’m not a fan of Lord Sugar but one has to admire his ability to generate controversy. His article in the Daily Telegraph where he says that networking events are a waste of time and only profit the organisers has certainly stirred up a hornets nest of comment within my network.

Lord Sugar wrote:
“I am sick and tired of hearing people asking what to do, going to networking meetings and seminars expecting to glean some gems of wisdom. These events are money-making exercises and benefit one party and one party only: the organiser.

As usual he’s has managed to polarise opinion with networking organisers, thinking he’s talking nonsense and others who think that he’s right. For my part I feel both have a valid opinion. For my part and, this is where I agree with Sugar, I avoid networking groups that give a piss poor product, and unfortunately there are too many of them!

Too often people are invited to a networking meeting without any idea of who else is attending and with no one to manage introductions. Time is wasted listening to sponsors and the organiser promoting their own business and when the speaker does satnd up it’s an anticlimax of mediocrity. However a well run event will always stand out from the crowd.

The rest of Sugar’s article talks about being self-reliant and in this I hope that his fee for writing the article was huge because it’s had the desired affect of generating discussion.

 Managing top talent so that they are engaged and remain with a business is a problem. Yesterday I found myself in a long discussion with with a friend who is concerned that he might lose some of his best talent.

1. The first thing that we could both agree on in that true talent is in short supply and is worth keeping at all costs and even when it leaves is worth maintaining contact in case one can attract it back!
2. Too many talented people become dissolusioned after having their expectations dashed with broken promises of personal learning, clear career path or making a contribution.
3. Often talent will be suffocated in large organisations and will prefer ambiguity and uncertainty because it fuels their thought processes and will therefore gravitate towards small business or even self-employment.

Motivating talent is difficult when they seem to be always ahead of the maingroup, with too many ideas and too little time and feeling that they are having to maintain their energy levels in the face of others who are lazy and have no vision.

After our discussion my friend came to two conclusions. The first was that talent is often complex and therefore needs to be understood and managed on an individual basis. Secondly that appropriate learning and stimulus programmes need to be in place in order to keep the talent engaged.

If you would like to hear more of our conclusions them please email me: stephen@assimilating-talent.com

Over the past few days I’ve had lots of people ask me about the Equality Act (UK) and specifically the type of questions that can and can’t be asked at an interview.

This video clip may help to identify some of the questions you shouldn’t be asking at an interview. The Act rightly identifies the reason that it’s the candidate’s qualifications, experiences and ability to be able to perform a job satisfactorily is what’s relevant and not aspects of home life, age, gender, sexual preference and so on.

Equality Act (UK) interview questions you must NOT ask

The Act covers many areas of discrimination at work, not covered in this video clip, and there is a huge amount of information on the web. We always always advise that you ask your professional advisor for help if needed and in preparing to hire talent.

I was asked a question on LinkedIn and this is a brief outline of my answer that I thought those in my network might find interesting

For many people there is a direct relationship with management
capability and high staff turnover. In my opinion, however, there also needs to be other
considerations before one always blames team managers.

Too often, in my experience, blame is placed on “Salary” as a reason why talent leaves when in fact the real reasons are in the company’s power to prevent. A motivating statistic is that when a talented individual
leaves the RISK that further talent will follow increases by 50%.

I was asked a few days ago what I felt were the the “mission critical strategies” that a business should employ for survival during the downturn.

The first piece of advice that I gave was not to be panicked into knee jerk reactions. Panic inevitably results in poor decision making and poor decisions inevitably leads to long term regret.

The answer was then expanded into six key areas:

1) Plan for a long downturn. It’s likely that things will be slow for between one year and five. (in Japan their last recession lasted a decade)

2) Focus on productivity.(Both individual and team delivery)

3) Retain the best talent and continue to develop it. (Historically, talent tends to leave when it believes it is not learning)

4) Encourage innovation

5) Ensure robust succession planning so that if people do leave there is continuation of productivity.

6) Reduce expenditure as far as possible on non-productive items

With the ongoing banking crisis and stock markets around the world continuing to fall it is possible that the best paid experts and talent in the future will not be bankers but those able to predict trends in business.

With everyone from Governments, businesses and individuals wanting answers to the current economic questions perhaps the best paid experts over the next two years will be those able to predict the future.

Of course the information being from futurologists, and paid for by business, will need to be based upon historical precedent and expert analysis. The individual in the street, however, might still have to rely on the astronomer’s predictions in their daily papers.