What's Best Next

You are here: Home / Archives for 4 - Management / d Tactical Excellence / Teams

Why “Hire Slow, Fire Fast” is Wrong

by

You often hear people say “hire slow, and fire fast.” Further, firing quickly is often presented as a “loving” thing to do, because then the person is freed up to pursue what might be a better fit.

This advice needs to be fired. It has problems on both sides of the equation. For one thing, there are times when you should actually hire fast. But more than that, saying that one should fire fast ignores very important distinctions that can lead to very bad decisions and harm to both the person and organization.

The distinction is between firing due to ability issues and character issues. 

If someone is abusive, causing harm in the organization, and acting against the values, then firing needs to happen fast.

But when the problem is ability issues — that is, the person wants to do good work but is struggling — then you fire slow. The aim is, in fact, not to have to fire at all. Instead, you discuss the issue with the person and coach them as much as possible to help overcome the ability issue.

If it cannot be overcome, and a change to a different role that is a better fit is not possible, then letting them go may be the right course of action. But only after defining the problem and helping the person overcome it.

Joseph Grenny, author of four New York Times bestsellers, including Crucial Conversations: Tools for Talking When the Stakes Are High, explains this very simply in this two-minute video from the Global Leadership Summit.

 

Collaboration is More than “Everyone Plays Their Part”

by

You’re likely working with other people to produce or create something this week.

God has put us in this together—different skills and experiences coming together to accomplish way more than we could accomplish on our own.

As Christians, we understand this at a foundational level. We know the call to use our different gifts to serve as “good stewards of God’s varied grace” (1 Peter 4:10). Or how, in the body of Christ, “the eye cannot say to the hand, ‘I have no need of you,’ nor again the head to the feet, ‘I have no need of you'” (1 Corinthians 12:21).

We believe deeply in coming together for a common mission, and we want the benefits that come from strong collaboration, whether in our church or our workplace.

But in practice we can miss out. More than that, we can experience tension or even conflict with our teammates when we approach “teamwork” or “collaboration” in different ways without realizing it.

As I’ve led and worked in different teams over the years, I’ve noticed two basic levels of collaboration and the challenges that come when we apply collaboration differently.

Here’s what I mean:

Level 1 collaboration looks something like this: 
  • “Everyone needs to play their part for us to do this well.”
  • “I’m responsible for making this decision.”
  • “You do this, I’ll do that, and together we can make a big difference.”
Level 2 collaboration, on the other hand, looks more like this:
  • “You’ve only been here a few weeks, but I really want your perspective.”
  • “Can I suggest another way to think about it before we make that policy shift?”
  • “I read about this new software. Wanted to make sure you knew about it…”
  • “That’s my idea. How can we make this stronger?”

We can limit our productivity as a team if we operate solely in Level 1. And we can actually be counter-productive when some of the team are operating in the former and others are aiming for the latter.

Level 1 collaboration has it’s place, but don’t settle for that. Level 2 collaboration is where the really good stuff happens.

Productivity Tip: Counteracting Groupthink in Meetings

by

In our organizations today, we spend significant time conducting and participating in meetings. This isn’t all bad, of course, as good meetings hold the potential for generating new ideas, aligning teams around a common purpose, and moving projects forward.

But when it comes to collaborative meetings, there are some common obstacles that hinder team productivity. The tendency of groupthink, for example. Or assuming that a more experienced colleague has the best idea (or the other way around). Or the respected leader who gives their opinion too soon, affecting the freedom others feel to share their perspective.

Today’s productivity tip is for the leader who’s aware of such tendencies and wants to avoid them. 

This comes from Daniel Kahneman’s popular book Thinking Fast and Slow. In a chapter on jumping to conclusions, Kahneman writes: 

Before an issue is discussed, all members of the committee should be asked to write a very brief summary of their position. This procedure makes good use of the value of the diversity of knowledge and opinion in the group. The standard practice of open discussion gives too much weight to the opinions of those who speak early and assertively, causing others to line up behind them.

I think this is really wise, even if it wouldn’t make sense in every meeting context.

If you’re responsible for facilitating meetings, try weaving something like this in where you can, especially for strategic planning, creative brainstorming, and other meetings where you need to leverage the gifts of the whole team.

We want the best ideas to win out, not just those that come from the most senior, the most confident, or the most savvy.

How Do You Assess a Team for Cohesiveness?

by

Lencioni offers these questions in The Four Obsessions of an Extraordinary Executive:

  • Are meetings compelling? Are the important issues being discussed? Lack of interest in meetings is a good indicator the team may be avoiding issues because they are uncomfortable with one another. “There is no excuse for having continually boring meetings” (149).
  • Do team members engage in unguarded debate? Do they honestly confront one another? Even teams that get along well should be experiencing regular conflict and intense debate during these meetings.
  • Do team members apologize if they get out of line? Do they ever get out of line?
  • Do team members understand one another? “Members of cohesive teams know one another’s strengths and weaknesses and don’t hesitate to point them out” (150).
  • Do team members avoid gossiping about one another?