I would like to welcome our new subscribers from the workshop in Denver, yesterday.

From the Ask Tom mailbag:

Question:
How does a manager determine a candidate’s Time Span capability?

Response:
Don’t over complicate this. Some managers think if they could just divine the number (Stratum I-II-III-IV) life would be good. What decisions would that impact?

• Which candidate should I hire?
• Which team member should I delegate this task to?
• Which person should I promote?

All legitimate decisions.

So here is your answer. Your candidate has Stratum III capability. Just kidding 🙂 But let’s say I’m not kidding 😐 Your candidate has Stratum III capability. Where does that get you in the decision? My guess, nowhere.

Assessing a candidate’s capability can be a futile exercise. It’s like a sucker punch, attracting the manager in the wrong direction. The only thing I care about is the candidate’s capability related to the work. The sucker punch leads me to make a judgment about the candidate (their innate capability), that I am not qualified to make (I am not a forensic psychologist).

Yet, I am an expert about the work. Focus on the work. Focus on the Level of Work. What are the problems to be solved? What are the decisions to be made? Now, I can answer this central question –

Has the candidate demonstrated evidence of effectiveness in this Level of Work, in these tasks and activities, solving these problems and making these decisions?

Most managers make defective hiring decisions because they have not clearly defined the Level of Work in the role. Without this definition, the interviewer asks the wrong questions and bases the hiring decision on some mistaken understanding of experience and skill.

Focus first on the Level of Work, then on the evidence of the candidate’s effectiveness in that work.