Reggie was grinning like a Cheshire cat. “I’m really lucky,” he said. “We are opening up a new division and I have three great candidates for the VP position. It’s actually going to be tough to pick which one I think will work out best.”
“Congratulations,” I offered. “Internal candidates or external candidates?”
“All internal. Homegrown. Got the right value system. Good decision-making skills.”
“And what will happen to the two candidates who will be left behind?” I asked.
Reggie stopped. He had been focused on his good fortune to have this kind of bench strength, but he had not considered what would happen after his selection.
“I guess they will just continue doing what they are doing now. I mean, they all play an important role, they just won’t be a Vice President in charge of a division.”
“They all know they are being considered as a viable candidate for the position?”
“Yep, I had a meeting, just last week, with all three of them. I wanted to be upfront, let them know what I was thinking.”
“And, have you noticed any change since you had that meeting?”
Again, Reggie stopped. He knew I hadn’t dropped by to chat about the weather. He also knew that sometimes, even on the outside, I hear about trouble before he does.
“So, something is up?” he guessed.
I nodded. “Don’t go jumping in there, but take some time to take a hard look at the new dynamics you just created.” -TF
There can only be one winner, and the dynamics change inevitably especially with the losers still in the company. The new Vice President’s leadership skills will be challenged when his team contains two unhappy people who did not get the position
Excellent post !! I did something like this and after reading your post it was a sort of “oh my god!” thing for me.
I wanted to select Project Managers from within the organization. I set out the eligibility criteria and asked people who qualify to apply for the post. The applicants will go through an exam and then an interview. The selected candidate will then undergo a training to be selected as PM. The entry criteria was set in way that only the top talent in our organization will qualify.
Now, I have got a list in which I have ranked all the applicants based on the exam score and I have shortlisted top 5 candidates. All the applicants are aware of their own ranking and that of other applicants.
What I have noticed is that people who considered themselves superior but did not got shortlisted consider the exam to be rigged/flawed and motivation is down. I now fear, that pygmalion effect will kick-in and the rejected people will start under-performing. The people who have been shortlisted already see themselves as PM and there is a detachment from their current roles.
What should I do now ?
Maybe the question is: how can I create realistic expectations?
I think this is an issue for talent management. When you have a pool of talented employees, you can select from, who know that each will have a respectfull position at time, will remain motivated. This prevents internal conflicts. So instead of doing the whole exercise at for 1 position, You maybe want to do the exercise in advance.