A stark reality of organizational life is that team composition changes from time to time. Sometimes people leave. At other times, shifts in vision dictate the necessity for new skills or abilities. At still other times, organizational growth requires new additions to the team. In every case, onboarding new team members is a normal function of organizational life.
While hiring new team members is normal it is not always comfortable. The organization I lead has recently engaged in a hiring process for a senior level leader. Rather than outsourcing, we handled the search process internally. In addition, we are a church, so several dynamics come into play that some traditional corporations may not deal with. That reality notwithstanding, the principles and considerations discussed in this article are still valid and generally applicable across a range of organizational types.
Wisdom dictates that new additions to a team should be carefully considered. Many leaders opine that you should “Hire slowly and fire quickly.” When a team member is no longer a good fit for the organization, it is poor stewardship of resources to carry them in the wrong role. Both the organization and the team member suffer because he cannot experience the blessing of flourishing when he cannot fulfill the requirements of the position. This does not mean that the person should be terminated necessarily, since onboarding new team members carries with it some calculated risks. Training, coaching, and even lateral movement are often (if not always) preferred to termination; however, doing nothing can never be an acceptable course of action.
When considering a new team member, it is important to consider and weigh appropriately the following four areas. There is a direct correlation between the member’s fit in these four areas and the success of the organization. While the weighting of importance for each area may vary, the greater the alignment in all of these areas, the greater the probability of success for the candidate in the new role.
The four areas are:
Calling:
- Does the candidate articulate a clear sense of calling—a discerned sense of purpose for the role?
- Does the candidate exhibit evidence of calling—a discerned observation of gifts/talent/abilities consistent with the role?
Character:
- Does the candidate express moral and spiritual traits consistent with the responsibility of the role?
- Is there a discipline of nurturing spiritual growth so as to increase intimacy with God?
- Is there a sense of mastery of the spiritual fruit of transformation and maturity consistent with the responsibilities of the role?
Competence:
- Does the candidate exhibit abilities and gifting consistent with the responsibilities of the role?
- Has there been adequate training and/or experience in the requisite skills for the role?
- Does the candidate possess gifts and abilities to make an immediate impact on the role in the context of the organization?
- Does the candidate display capacity to grow or improve with the role as it grows? (No one should be brought onto a team to maintain but to grow and flourish. Always hire toward vision rather than historical norms).
Culture:
- Does the candidate possess adequate EQ (emotional intelligence/people skills and self-awareness/discipline) to function well in the immediate and larger team of the organization?
- Does the candidate inspire others to become better?
- Would others on the team want to “hang out” with or have the candidate over for dinner?
These four areas are elements of the undivided whole of the candidate. A leader’s responsibility toward the candidate and the organization is to seek a good fit in all areas. The leader that “sells” him or herself on a candidate in spite of obvious deficiencies will most certainly experience “buyers’ remorse” in the not-so-distant future. So, leaders…do the hard work on the front end and avoid the heartache on the back.
Recent Comments