Entrepreneurs, mompreneurs, solopreneurs, micropreneurs, partnerpreneurs, kidpreneurs, the list grows daily.

If you listen to the media these days the only career of merit is to be a somethingpreneur and that those who work for large companies should quit to start their own biz or be branded as losers.

I am taking this opportunity to state categorically, once and for all that that’s a crock.

Seriously.

There are millions of talented, driven, high producers who work happily in large companies of all kinds across the country.

They aren’t there because they are scared to do their own thing.

They aren’t there because they aren’t innovative or lack creativity.

They aren’t there because they are lazy, uncaring or stupid.

They don’t deserve to be labeled drudges or losers because they thrive in the corporate world.

They are the people who will buy or use the somethingpreneur products.

Their employers are the companies that will acquire or partner many of the somethingpreneur companies.

The somethingpreneur ecosystem would crash and burn without these companies and their employees.

The companies would crash and burn without those employees.

Somethingpreneurs couldn’t scale their companies without these people.

The idea that a person is better because they founded or work in a startup is hype; they are different, not worse or better—just different.

No matter the size of the company, it comes down to cultural fit.

Not just the company culture, but the specific culture propagated by the manager for whom they work.

It’s not just about risk-taking. The days when corporate size, unions, public service or professional degrees (doctors, lawyers) mitigated job risk are long gone.

It’s not even about a person’s accomplishments in their previous/current job.

It’s about what that person would do in your company’s culture and under your management.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/koalazymonkey/5089128512/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

John Warrillow, at BNET, writes that the best question for weeding out victim mentality is “Tell me about the last time you made a mistake.”

He says that if the person accepts full accountability and doesn’t try to excuse or blame anyone else he almost always hires them.

While I agree it’s a great question and that the response tells you a lot about the candidate, I disagree that taking full responsibility necessarily makes a good hire.

There is a substantial difference between making excuses and a situation that leaves the person with no choice but to make the mistake.

There are too many managers who set their people up to fail, whether unintentionally or not. (Yes, there are mangers who do it intentionally.)
There is a difference between stating why the mistake was made and describing what could/should have been done differently and playing victim.

I advise creating a different dialog.

Manager: Tell me how [whatever].

Candidate responds.

Manager: Is that how you would have done it if you were in charge?

Candidate responds yes or no.

Manager: Why?

Asking why gets you to what you really want to know, which is how the candidate thinks.

How the person thinks is the crux, whether the candidate is a senior exec, admin or somewhere in-between.

And while it’s a good question to add to your interview repertoire I don’t think it’s strong enough to stand on it’s own as a ‘make or break’.

While discovering if the person has a victim mentality is useful, what is the advantage of hiring someone willing to take responsibility for a mistake that really isn’t theirs?

You need to know more; extenuating circumstances that at first may sound like an excuse can turn out to be plain facts.

Explore why the mistake happened, if and how it was rectified and what could have been done to prevent it.

In short, take time to dig deeper into any response that brings up a red flag, but do it with an open mind.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/wadem/2808468566/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Are you already a devotee of insanely smart hiring, in the process of changing after reading insanely stupid hiring or somewhere in-between?

Wherever your MAP is on the subject there is one thing about hiring that you need to wrap your head around if you want your career to flourish.

You can not hire stars, but you can create and maintain them.

This is as true of executives and management as it is of workers at all levels.

Think of hiring in terms of planting a garden—only these plants have feet.

You’re at the nursery and find a magnificent rose. It’s large, because it’s several years old, has dozens of blooms and buds and is exactly what you wanted for a particular space in your yard.

The directions say that the rose needs full sun to thrive, while the space in your yard only gets four to five hours of morning sun. But the rose is so gorgeous you can’t resist, convincing yourself that those hours from sunrise to 11 will be enough, so you take it home and plant it.

It seems to do OK at first, but as time goes by it gets more straggly and has fewer and fewer blooms.

Finally, you give it to your friend who plants it in a place that gets sun from early morning to sunset.

By the end of the next summer the rose is enormous, covered in blooms and has sprouted three new canes.

One of the things that insanely smart hiring does is ensure that people are planted where they will flourish, whether they are already thriving or are leaving an inhospitable environment.

I said earlier that people are like plants with feet. Abuse a plant, whether intentionally or through neglect, and it will wither and eventually die; abuse your people and sooner or later they will walk.

Insanely smart hiring also gives you a giant edge whether the people market is hot or cold.

By knowing exactly what you need, your culture, management style and the environment you have to offer you are in a position to find hidden and unpolished jewels, as well as those that have lost their luster by being in the wrong place. (Pardon the mixed metaphors. Ed)

These are often candidates that other managers pass on, but who will become your stars—stars with no interest in seeking out something else.

They recognize insanely smart opportunities when they see them.

Flickr image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ideonexus/3937284735

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Yesterday we looked at insanely stupid hiring and I said we would explore the alternatives today.

Every time a manager tells me that staffing gets in the way of their “real work” it makes me crazy. For decades I’ve heard this same stupid statement from various managers, from CEO to team leaders, and none of them was stupid.

Insanely smart (or stupid) hiring starts with individual MAP (mindset, attitude, philosophy™).

Here is the basic attitude of insanely smart managers, voiced decades ago by Terry Dial, who eventually became vice chairman of Business Banking at Wells Fargo.

“People are 90% of our costs as well as the key to customer service and satisfaction. The only thing that should take priority over hiring a new employee is keeping a current one.”

Overview of insanely smart hiring

1. Hire people to be part of the team. In other words, people who share your values, will support your culture, are fascinated with your product and believe in your company.
2. Take time to define what you really need. In other words, the right person for the right job at the right time and for the right reasons.
3. What you see may not be what you get. In other words, commit the time needed to interview thoroughly.
4. Performance isn’t always portable. In other words, be sure you can supply the management and environment in which the candidate can flourish.

How to practice insanely smart hiring

• Insanely smart mangers know that no matter what else they have to do it is people, acquiring them, motivating them and retaining them, that is their “real work.”
• Insanely smart managers never lose sight of this basic law of managing—there is nothing a manager can do personally (to save their review) that will off-set the effect of their under or non-performing group.
• It is easier to be an insanely smart manager if you work for an insanely smart company, or at least manager, that understands there is no hiring gene and good staffing skills are learned, not born—but don’t count on it.
• Insanely smart hiring is real work that requires time, energy and commitment.
• Insanely smart mangers focus on ending up being the dumbest person in the group.
• Insanely smart managers never hire jerks, no matter how much pressure they are under.

Join me Monday when we consider how insanely smart hiring creates stars and boosts retention.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ideaconstructor/563596890

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

On March 25^th I read an article on the newest perk, teaching employees how to start their own company, being used to lure talent; I choked and saved the URL for today’s post.

A few days later I read Bill Taylor’s reaction to the same article at HBR. To say that Taylor, who is a co-founder of Fast Company, is a big booster of entrepreneurial efforts is like saying Google is a modest success, but his reaction was the same as mine.

Rather than rehashing what he said (click and read it) I want to point out why jumping through hoops to hire from a certain tiny percentage of available talent is insanely stupid and tomorrow I’ll offer alternatives.

• Insane because, as Einstein so aptly put it, “insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.”
• Stupid because there is a wide range of talent available that would work its butt off for the right reasons.

Why it’s insanely stupid

1. The candidate who joins a company primarily for money, stock or whatever is hot du jour will quickly leave for more money, stock or hotter du jour. In other words, when joining a company is “all about me” there is nothing invested in the company, its values/culture, products or even its success, so when (not if) the going gets rough there’s no vested reason to stay.
2. Many companies and managers hire as much for bragging rights as for need. In other words, do you really need to hire god or will an angel or even a mortal do the job just as well?
3. One manager’s star is another manager’s failure. In other words, past achievement is an indicator, not a guarantee, of future performance.
4. Candidates have definite cultural ideas and needs. In other words, people perform based on how synergistic their cultural and managerial needs are with the same elements in their employer.

(Note: although the focus here is on software development, I’ve seen the same insanely stupid hiring in most fields and industries at one time or another.)

Companion posts,

• Insanely Smart Hiring
• Insanely Smart Retention and Stars

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/thewhitestdogalive/3100357559/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

Mark Suster is well known in the startup world; he started as an entrepreneur and is now a VC. In a post that ran first at TechCrunch and then at AlwaysOn where I saw it, he talks about the importance of attitude over aptitude in a startup.

Which is ridiculous—not the importance, but the idea that it is somehow more important to a startup.

1. Managers fight to hire the best in any given field, whether software developers, engineers, financial types, salespeople, etc.
2. Managers want the best and brightest and get very offended when told that that isn’t always the best choice.
3. Managers write job descriptions that are laundry wish lists, with little consideration for the real requirements based on the actual work, strengths of the team and room to grow.
4. Managers want more years of experience than the subject has been in existence; this is especially true in software development.
5. Managers kid themselves that people are portable, like cell phone numbers, and will continue performing at peak levels no matter the management style or culture.

Obviously, not all managers, but too many.

Whether you are hiring for a startup or your company has been around for decades, keep these points in mind:

• Talented people perform best when they are challenged;
• hire what you really need (see number 3 above);
• honestly evaluate the environment you are offering (see number 5 above);
• the more variety in previous jobs the better/faster the learning curve; and
• look for the uncut gems and diamonds, instead of chasing the polished stone that turns out to be faux.

Skills can be learned, but trying to change a person’s MAP is a thankless job, not to mention a losing proposition.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/zedbee/103147140/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

In my varied reading I keep seeing articles and blogs talking about the importance of assessing cultural fit, understanding management styles and approaches, etc., and they go on to recommend asking direct questions to obtain the information.

However, no matter which side of the desk you are on, direct questions will rarely achieve your goal.

Here’s why.

Direct questions contain the correct answer. In legal terms it’s referred to as “leading the witness.”

The following are examples from real interviews.

• “We at XYZ believe that teamwork is a major factor in our success and are looking to hire more; are you a team player, Ms. Candidate?” The candidate responded that she believed that being a good team player was of paramount importance for a company’s success.
• “I’m looking for an opportunity that will challenge me and a manager who will coach me so I can move to the next level; will I find that in the job you have open?” The manager responded that there were many opportunities for promotion and that he relished helping his people grow.

Both interviews continued along these lines, each person assuring the other that they fit the profile indicated by the questions.

In both cases the interviews resulted in offers and hires.

Neither one lasted six months.

What happened?

Did the candidate or manager intentionally lie or did they unconsciously say what the other person wanted to hear?

In most of the cases I’ve seen it’s the latter.

Candidates are encouraged to do what it takes to “get the offer,” while managers want to fill the position as quickly as possible and move forward.

People are smart and both go into the interview wanting it to work. The result is that they give the “right” answer, with little thought to the long term outcome.

The take away for you is to make this axiom part of your MAP, so it will guide your responses automatically, whether you are a manager hiring or a candidate interviewing:

Don’t lead the witness and don’t follow where the witness leads.

For guidance on asking non-leading questions click the appropriate link, RampUp’s CheatSheet for InterviewERS or RampUp’s CheatSheet for InterviewEEs™

Image credit: Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

In an NYT interview Michael Lebowitz, founder and C.E.O. of design firm Big Spaceship, passes on some excellent information on hiring, building a team and culture.

Here are two of the points with the greatest impact,

One of my longest-standing clients, a very smart guy, says: “There’s two ways to manage. You can hire to be the smartest person in the room or you can hire to be the dumbest person in the room.”

He says he works at being the dumbest.

And

“Don’t hire jerks, no matter how talented.”

Lebowitz says that there is no place for rock stars and I agree totally, unless you are naïve enough to believe they can function alone, without the cooperation, support and backing of the team.

Hiring rock stars means turnover—not productivity.

I’ve seen many team members leave because their manager’s focus was so completely on taking care of his few stars that he had nothing left over for the rest.

One of the finest managers I know has had a team packed with stars everywhere he’s worked. Partly because his reputation is well known and talent flocks to work for him, but mainly because he passionately believes that most people have the ability to become stars, some brighter than others, and he manages them accordingly.

True, he works harder at managing than many and has been kidded by his peers about the lengths to which he goes, but he tells me he wouldn’t have it any other way.

I once asked him how he got to be that way and he said that he’d never done anything that he didn’t want from his own manager, so it wasn’t a big deal.

I couldn’t resist asking if he was managed the way he did manage.

His response was a smile and laugh and that just because he didn’t get it didn’t mean that he didn’t want it.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/stampinmom/5371862260/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

I was delighted when I read Alan Lewis’ article in HBR on why his $600 million dollar company is more interested in a cultural match than a skills match when hiring. Although the interview techniques he describes may not travel well, the necessity for a cultural match is bang on.

As Lou Gerstner said after leading the turnaround at IBM, “Culture isn’t just one aspect of the game, it is the game.”

10 years ago I wrote an article for MSDN about how to use company culture as a screening tool to find good matches and avoid hiring turkeys of any kind that works at all levels; I’ve posted slightly updated versions on the blog every couple of years since 2006.

With hiring heating up in some sectors and still tight in others it’s more important than ever. The old management attitude of “hire, flip and replace if someone doesn’t work out” doesn’t fly well any more.

As important as cultural fit is in the ranks, it is a thousand times more important as you move up the management ladder and absolutely critical at the executive level—the higher the level of a bad cultural fit the more extensive the damage that will be done.

Don’t Hire Turkeys!
Use Your Culture as an Attraction, Screening and Retention Tool to Turkey-Proof Your Company.

Companies don’t create people—people create companies.

All companies have a culture composed of its core values and beliefs, essentially its corporate MAP (mindset, attitude, philosophy™); that culture is why people join the company and why they leave if it changes.

Generally, people don’t like bureaucracy, politics, backstabbing, etc., but when business stress goes up, or business heats up, cultural focus is often overwhelmed by other priorities.

In startups, it’s easier to hire people who are culturally compatible, because the founders first hire all their friends, and then their friend’s friends.

After that, when new positions have to be filled the only people available are strangers.

So how do you hire strangers and not lose your culture?

Since your culture is a product of your people, hire only people with matching or synergistic attitudes. The trick is to have a turkey sieve that will automatically screen out most of the misfits and turn on the candidates with the right values and attitudes.

Here is how you do it.

• Your sieve is an accurate description of your real culture.
• It must be hard copy (write it out), fully publicized (everyone needs to know, understand, believe and talk about it), and, most important of all, it must be real.
• Email it to every candidate before their interview and be sure that everyone talks about the culture during the interview and sells the company’s commitment to it.
• Everybody interviewing needs to listen carefully to what the candidate is saying and not saying; don’t expect a candidate to openly admit to behaviors that don’t fit the company MAP, since she may be unaware of them, may assume that your culture is more talk than walk or consider it something that won’t apply to her.
• Red flags must be followed up, not ignored because of skills or charm.
• Consider the various environments in which she’s worked; find out if she agreed with how things were done, and, more importantly, how she would have done them if she had been in control.
• Whether or not the candidate is a manager, you want to learn about her management MAP, approaches to managing, leadership and work function methods.
• Probing people to understand what their responses, conscious as well as intuitive, are to a variety of situations reveals how they will act, react, and contribute to your company’s culture and its success.

Finally, it is up to the hiring manager to shield the candidate from external decision pressures, e.g., friends already employed by the company, headhunters, etc.

Above all, it is necessary to give all candidates a face-saving way to withdraw their candidacy and say no to the opportunity. If they don’t have a graceful way of exiting the interview process they may pursue, receive, and accept an offer, even though they know deep down it is not a good decision.

A bad match will do major damage to the company, people’s morale, and even the candidate, so a “no” is actually a good thing.

Remember, the goal is to keep your company culture consistent and flexible as you grow. From the time you start this process, you need to consciously identify what you have, decide what you want it to be, publicize it, and use it as a sieve to be sure that everyone who joins, fits.

Use your cultural sieve uniformly at all levels all the time. If someone sneaks through, which is bound to happen occasionally, admit the error quickly and give her the opportunity to change, but if she persists then she has to go.

Do this and watch retention, creativity, productivity and morale surge ever higher.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/zedbee/103147140/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL

The fastest way to kill your startup is to screw up your hiring.

If you don’t kill the company bad hiring will your culture.

Even if nothing dies poor hiring will make growth far more difficult.

I’m not the only one who thinks so.

Vator.tv asks this question in its investor profiles: What is the #1 mistake entrepreneurs make; samplings of recent responses are telling:

• Rajil Kapoor, managing director of Mayfield – Not hiring people better than themselves
• Tim Chang of Norwest Venture Partners – Not building a world-class team
• Joe Kraus, entrepreneur and investor – Not hiring well and/or hiring too fast (lesson learned as an entrepreneur – hire slowly and hire better than yourself, always.)

A few years ago I wrote You R Who You Hire; that wasn’t the first time I wrote on the topic (there are dozens of posts here on the importance of hiring well and how to do it) and this one won’t be the last.

So in the interest of better hiring, I’m posting RampUp’s CheatSheet for InterviewERS for you to use. It works for any hiring manger, whether in a startup, an enterprise or anything in-between.

Be sure to join me next week for a way to ensure a great interview.

Image credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/thetruthabout/4121026060/

Your comments-priceless

Don’t miss a post! Subscribe via RSS or EMAIL