If the past is a predictor of the future, there is a high probability that people with a dismal track record, who repeatedly fail at their assigned tasks, will fail at the task you are considering offering them, too.
So far, nothing new.
But why are they failing, and what are the repercussions if you missed doing your due diligence and hired them?
Here is my insight.
My observation is that people who repetitively fail tend to bite off more than they can chew, chew more than they can swallow. They do not have a realistic view of their capabilities; their ego drives them hard, and they often commit to delivering on goals that have a very low chance of being met. They promise too much, and they truly believe they can do it. If these people had a realistic view of their capabilities, they would have sought and accepted assignments at which they had a better chance of success.
Because they truly believe in their superior talents, they often sell themselves convincingly and are hired. Eventually, their employers are disappointed. In the meantime, time and resources have been lost.
But these are not the only results of such hiring.
Unfortunately, since losers are blind to their limitations, they do not take responsibility for their failures. They don’t learn from their mistakes, and thus they repeat them over and over. Worse, they blame others for their failures: It is always someone else – often, the person who hired them – who has failed them.
Thus, hiring “losers” doesn’t just waste resources. It has other unfortunate side effects that are even more dangerous: These people will spread gloom and ruin your hard-earned reputation.
So should you hire only those with a track record of repetitive success?
Not necessarily. It might be that those who constantly succeed are shooting too low, in order to ensure their success.
I prefer people who have failed periodically, who overcame that failure and eventually succeeded. That demonstrates the strength of their personality.
Success is not how little you fall, but how fast you get up. Falling is necessary for testing your limitations but only as long as you get up and learn from it.
Sincerely,
Dr. Ichak Kalderon Adizes
Very deep and interesting insight.
Dr. Adizes, I found your methodology and your overall approach and theories, very revolutionary and very well sustained. I studied your methods mainly from some books of yours: Mastering Change, The Ideal Executive, Persuit of Prime, and other sources.
During some of the past years, in which I worked in IT Consultancy, these methods where truly applicable and SURPRISINGLY effective. I gain a lot of new insights and deep understanding of teamwork in a deeper sense. This methods changed me.
Consultancy work is I and E focused. Less p and a.
Now, I am working again in Software Development. Surprisingly for myself (and this is the thought I want to share with you, and ask for your opinion): I absolutely fail trying to apply mutual trust and respect methods. The people didn’t work neither do their assignments and they lied to cover up themselves.
You see, Software Devolpment is very similar to manufacturing (curious but true). Programmers specially are strongly P driven (a lot of them are Lone Rangers). They are similar to a factory laborer and Software Development is similar to assembly line manufacturing. Of course it is also a deeply creative work, but very structured and focused on Production (P). Some are incredibly P focused: and think the even have negative (not zero: I mean negative) A, E and I.
So, I found in exchange that some of Peter Drucker’s old methods (management of manufacturing) where successful.
I think this is mainly because strong P orientation of the overall group and little i, Project Manager should be is more like pAEI or pAeI.
At first, employees didn’t understand what was to handle A, I or E. They felt disoriented, perplexed.
Please give me your opinion.
With all my respect Dr.
Prof. Adizes,
Very wise insight, should be printed and put on the wall,foe an every day reminder
Ezry Akkerman
Cyclotec
Your article reveals what I believe is one of the most critical issues to discover in the hiring interview, determining the candidates locus of control. Do they take responsibility for their failure [internal locus of control] or do they blame others [external locus of control]? Carol Quinn wrote a great book that offers great value on individuals perception of control and how important it is in the hiring process. It’s called Don’t Hire Anyone Without Me.
I very much enjoy the Adizes’s insights and muses as they are fundimentally sound in judgement, and in practice, the effort to detail a predictable result. Perhaps some of that same focused sanity can be directed at a two party political system locked at impass and seemily well past PRIME.
I very much appreciate Ichak’s articles. I remember reading his tennis court analogy and other articles years ago and at that time realized that Ichak is a genius.
Thanks
I was wondering where your blog was going, until you hit the idea that some people deliberately aim low in order that they never appear to fail. I guess I fell into this category for many years, until I had a mentor who’s only advice to me was to get out of my comfort zone. Suddenly I realized the power of learning and self analysis and, provided I was working with a supportive manager, could achieve far more than I ever thought possible.
Now that I am an interim director and coach in my own right, these lessons have never been as relevant as they are now. Finding the line between incompetance and aspiration is tough, but oh so worth it!
Ichak. This is very true. A great insight.
Best Regards,
Dion
One of my mentors always told me: “It is okay to fail as long as you fail better the next time.”
Some observations:
• Reductionistic view of the situation
• Isolation of the individual from the interactions with the system
• The individual performer is assumed to be opportunistic and dishonest. Management is the victim.
• Once a loser always a loser. Very limiting view of the capabilities of most human beings.
This post is not a good example for new leaders. We have enough evidence that blaming the individual is poor leadership.
Dr Ichak, It is incredible how your insight illuminates me on what is going on these days at my work. I’m really frustrated because I cant believe that people with” higher hierarchy” in the company can act in such a “looser way”. Is like they are just “protecting their jobs” instead of searching ways for the company profits to grow. I believe as a comment to your insight that sometimes Managers think that there is a direct relationship on the amount paid to a person and the amount of work they can delegate to them. Managers think that “work” and “responsabilities” are synonims. I really hope with better Management Education we can understand that difference, instead on making mistakes over and over again.
I have a question: Older persons can solve in a better way complex problems of a company than younger persons? (Older means more age and more education) I believe the answer is no, but then the question is:
When the answer of this first question transform from yes to no? In transforms when the managers realize that they are loosing a lot of money?
Thanks for your insight.