Years ago, I was the Director of Business Development (Midwest Region) for CUH2A (now HDR)—a multi-office, international, AE firm. The firm’s recruiting style was second-to-none (worthy of a separate blog post!) During the process—which can be described as thorough, diligent, mutually informative, exhausting, and exhilarating all at once!—one message really stuck with me: “Mediocrity is eventually purged from our system.”
The context: I had expressed admiration for their recruiting approach. I asked: “Even after all of your due diligence, does your firm ever make hiring mistakes?” Their response: “Sure, we do. But those ‘mistaken hires’ eventually figure it out in a self-selection sort of way. They naturally get purged from the system in a reasonable time frame.”
My interpretation of that blunt, candid response: Sometimes even our carefully selected recruits will under-perform. Our system is set up, though, to offer each person the tools and support they need to succeed. If success is not realized, our culture and environment is one where they realize the discrepancy and move on per their own accord.
To me, that seemed—and still seems—to be a valid approach.
This memory popped into my head today. You see, I teach two sections of Oral Communications for Managers at Columbia College. The class is typically 10-15 students, three hours long, one day per week. Because the course is intensive (presentations almost every week), and because each student has his own special set of goals/needs, this class works best when it is small. In my dreams, the class would only be eight students, so that by semester’s end I’d be able to push each and every one of them to their tippy top communications potential. But alas, the school caps the class at 15, rather than at eight. I’ve made my case, but no luck in changing the max enrollment.
So, today was our first day of spring semester. I gave my usual speech, which involves letting students know that this class is best-suited for those who intend to take it seriously, come to every class as an active participant, and make successful communications a priority. I give them specifics on the meaning of that criteria in context with the course—describing the assignments and expectations in detail, along with letting them know what they will receive from me in return.
For those students who don’t fit the criteria, they are better off taking the course with another instructor. I even offer for them to leave at the break mid-class, so that they do not waste a full three hours with me if they aren’t sincerely on board.
This approach works pretty well, in that it helps the students to self-select….or, in the theme of this blog, self-purge.
As an AEC professional, are you clarifying mutual expectations for your teams and colleagues? Are you inviting people to make another choice, aka, ‘get out’, if they are not on board? In my experience and opinion, sharing the vision and being a team player are not optional. Rather, they are requirements if you want to stick around and be a part of the solution*.
*Special note: This message is not suggesting that you blindly go along with a vision or team with whom you do not principally agree. It’s up to you to self-select. There are always choices. Leaders are responsible for making the direction and choices known. Individuals within the group/team are responsible for either 1. getting/staying on board; 2. stepping up to initiate improvement/change; 3. getting out.