The Good Ones. Bruce Weinstein
Читать онлайн книгу.
is a simple concept: character. It turns out that character and performance are strongly intertwined. “People who have, for lack of a better term, ‘ethical lapses,’ are never your high-performing employees,” says Kenneth Meyer, vice president of human resources for Community Healthcare Network in New York City. “They’re either marginal or poor performers.”
So why are there so few references to character in job descriptions? What’s behind the reluctance to bring up character in a job interview? “People are afraid that this could be invasive,” says Ana Cristina Reymundo, founder and first editor of American Airlines’ Nexos magazine. “We don’t know how to gauge character. We haven’t been trained to gauge character. Perhaps we think that a person’s bio or résumé reveals their character, but that’s not true.”
Another reason that character is overlooked is because it’s taken for granted. “There’s an assumption that you’re already trying to hire someone of high character,” notes Kirk LaPointe, executive director of the Organization of News Ombudsmen. “But we don’t really test our employees in the interview process. We look at their skill sets, and we check references, but we don’t get a good firsthand grip on character until they get in the door. It could be because it’s more involved and requires a greater dedication to the recruitment process.”
As important as knowledge and skill are in successful employees, “they’re needed to play, but they’re not needed to win,” notes Alan Tecktiel. “Yet as critical as character is, employers aren’t sure how to define or measure it.”
Then there’s the comfort factor. “No one would like to be asked in the first round, ‘Are you honest?,’” Kirk says, “but around the area of character, and in particular how someone would handle a difficult situation, that gets into intimate territory, and we’re still queasy about that. We’re treating the employee/employer process almost like a first date, when you’re all on good behavior.” Although the reluctance to bring up honesty and other facets of a job applicant’s character in an interview is understandable, companies cannot afford to overlook it.
In the interviews I conducted for this book, the most common reasons managers gave me as to why their organizations don’t emphasize character in hiring and promoting employees are, first, that there doesn’t seem to be a universally understood definition of character; and, second, even if we could agree on what it means to be a person of high character, we don’t know how to measure those qualities.
These challenges are not insurmountable. Even if there isn’t a one-size-fits-all definition of character, and even if evaluating character is more of an art than a science, companies that place a premium on the character of job applicants and current employees are positioned to succeed in ways that their competitors cannot. Let’s first try to make sense of the thorny concept of character.
What Is Character?
Character refers to the most important qualities that define a person’s identity. It is revealed not by words but by actions. Character stands in contrast to other qualities that describe a person but don’t speak to that person’s essential nature.
Consider two coworkers, Joe and Mike. Both are 5´7,˝ both are slightly balding, and both like classic rock. Joe has a slightly disheveled appearance, as does Mike. But Joe is self-obsessed, angry, and loves to tell offensive jokes. When you talk with him, the conversation always ends up circling back to Joe. He doesn’t seem to know or care what effect he has on other people.
Mike, on the hand, frequently asks you how you are — and carefully listens to your answer. Mike never fails to thank you for things you’ve done on his behalf, and you’ve rarely seen him lose his temper. While these two employees may be similar in their physical appearance, style of dress, and taste in music, there are good reasons to believe that Mike is an employee of high character and Joe is not.
Mike and Joe can’t do anything about their height, unless 1970s-style platform shoes become fashionable again. They could do something about their appearance, but being mildly unkempt isn’t a serious breach of the dress code at work. And liking one kind of music over another is no different from preferring West Indian Licorice Mocha Delight ice cream over French vanilla. None of these attributes speaks to Mike or Joe’s character. But the way the two men treat other people does.
I’m not suggesting that Joe doesn’t deserve to work at your organization. He might do his job well, and he may have wonderful qualities he doesn’t reveal at work — maybe he’s a good husband, a loving father, and active with a local volunteer organization. But because his behavior at work is often insensitive, self-centered, and off-putting, it’s difficult to characterize Joe in the same glowing terms you might use to describe Mike.
Mike is a high-character employee. Joe is not. You may not know precisely how they got that way, but you can be sure that three things have contributed to it.
Time, Practice, and Commitment
Character is developed over time, with consistent effort. Character development is similar to weight training. It takes several trips to the gym every week for months to build strength, and if you stop, your body returns to the way it used to be.
When I was writing my doctoral dissertation, I started lifting weights to help deal with the stress of the work. The first time I tried the bench press, I could hardly lift the bar even with no weights on it. Gradually I was able to lift more and more, until finally people started commenting on how strong my upper body looked. Sometime later I stopped weight training, and those bulging pecs returned to their normal, less impressive proportions.
By the same token, it takes constant effort to develop and sustain the traits associated with high character. In his book 10% Happier, the ABC News journalist Dan Harris talks about how hard he has had to work to develop patience and presence. An on-air meltdown prompted him to reevaluate the way he was living, and he discovered that developing a mindfulness meditation practice helped him to “neutralize the voice in the head,” as he puts it, and live more fully in the moment. Being present and resisting the urge to dwell on the past or future is something he works at — hard — every day. Some days go better than others, but overall, he notes, he is much nicer to be around and much less prone to lose his temper.
Is it possible for Joe to develop the high-character traits that Mike already displays? Yes. With the right management and a willingness to acknowledge his shortcomings, Joe may be able to change. But for this to happen, both Joe and his company would have to make an investment in him that one or both might not want to make. Yet if Joe doesn’t change and is promoted to a more responsible position, his problems may have profound consequences for the organization and the people it serves.
Smart companies seek to hire and promote high-character people like Mike for five reasons:
• They make coming to work a more agreeable experience for everyone, which is good for employee morale.
• They contribute significantly to the organization’s financial health by being highly productive and developing strong relationships with clients.
• They tend to be loyal to their employers. People like Mike stick around.
• They advance the company’s mission of enhancing people’s lives.
• They reflect well on the company, which is valuable for its own sake and also promotes positive word-of-mouth.
Assuming that Mike and Joe have the same knowledge and skills, Mike is the more desirable employee, because, at least at work, he is a person of greater character. Mike is one of the Good Ones. But how can a business determine whether the person they’re considering hiring is more like Mike or more like Joe? Let’s take a look.
Evaluating High-Character Employees
Even if we agree on the qualities that comprise high character, the question remains: How can managers determine whether job candidates and current employees possess these qualities? It’s especially difficult to assess the character of job candidates, but there are also some surprising obstacles to evaluating the character of current employees.
Scott