Do Business Well

Why do I continue to assume that a person’s success on one rung will have any relevance to his or her likelihood to succeed on the rung above? More than likely I have been confused about what is trainable and what is not. I have made no distinction among skills, knowledge, and talents, and this clumsy language has made it easier for us to say, “If John has shown himself to be a good salesperson, then I am sure I can just train him to be a good manager.” Or, “Since Jan has proven herself a solid manager, I am confident that I can teach her the strategic thinking and the vision needed to be a great leader.”

I now know that excellence in every role requires distinct talents, and that these talents, unlike skills and knowledge, are extraordinarily difficult to train. Armed with this knowledge, I can dismantle some long-standing career paths. I know that the talents needed to sell and the talents needed to manage, while not mutually exclusive, are different—if you excel at one, it does not tell us very much about whether you will excel at the other. I can say the same about the talents needed to manage, as compared to the talents needed to lead. In fact, I can say the same about all roles—even roles that, at first glance, seem to be very similar.

Consider, for example, the conventional information technology career path. If you work in information technology, you will tend to begin your career as a computer programmer—writing code—and then progress to a systems analyst role—designing integrated systems. Programmer to systems analyst: these are the first two rungs on the conventional IT career path. And given their superficial similarity, this would seem to be a sensible way to structure things.

In fact, these two roles are quite different. Great programmers possess a thinking talent called problem solving. The best programmers want to be given all of the pieces to the puzzle. Once they are armed with all the pieces, their particular talent is the ability to rearrange the pieces so that they all fit together perfectly. In their personal life this talent often draws them toward crossword puzzles or brainteasers. In their professional life this talent enables them to write thousands of lines of computer code and arrange them in the most effective and efficient order.

While this talent is nice for a systems analyst to possess, it is not particularly relevant to success on the job. By contrast, their most important thinking talent is called formulation. They revel in situations where they are faced with incomplete data. Lacking some of the most important facts, they can then do what they love: play out alternative scenarios, hypothesize, test out their theories. On the job this talent enables them to construct highly intricate systems and then test these systems for bugs. If one system has a glitch, they then play out different scenarios, narrowing the range of possible solutions until they have identified exactly what needs to be changed and where and why.

The talents of problem solving and formulation are not mutually exclusive. It is entirely possible for an employee to possess both. But if you are blessed with problem solving, it does not necessarily mean that you are similarly blessed with formulation. To promote programmers to systems analysts simply because the conventional career path dictates that you should is to take a blind roll of the dice. You are just as likely to wind up with a team of misfits as you are a team of talented systems analysts.

Before you promote someone, look closely at the talents needed to excel in the role—the striving, thinking, and relating talents necessary for success. After scrutinizing the person and the role, you may still choose promotion. And since each person is highly complex, you may still end up promoting your employee into a position where he struggles—no manager finds the perfect fit every time. But at least you will have taken the time to weigh the fit between the demands of the role and the talent of the person.

If Marc’s managers had bothered to think this through, perhaps they would have seen the poor fit between the Washington job, which required a reporter who loved to spice things up, and Marc, whose dominant talent was an ability to calm things down.

Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)
My Successful Business Tips, One Rung Doesn’t Necessarily Lead to Another

• Survive the first Month
• A Lateral Move Can Lead Upward
• Business Management, Career Crisis/ Disaster, why some Outcomes deny the Definition
• How competitive are you? How powerful is your desire to win? continue...
• Cultivating allies
• Opportunity for the Acting Manager
• Job Career and no Job no Career, Coping with Dismissal
• How High Is High Enough for You?
• Working With Your Hotshot Assistant
• The Art of Tough Love: how do great managers terminate someone and still keep the relationship intact? part 3

5 Comments »