Author Archives: Tom Foster

About Tom Foster

Tom Foster spends most of his time talking with managers and business owners. The conversations are about business lives and personal lives, goals, objectives and measuring performance. In short, transforming groups of people into teams working together. Sometimes we make great strides understanding this management stuff, other times it’s measured in very short inches. But in all of this conversation, there are things that we learn. This blog is that part of the conversation I can share. Often, the names are changed to protect the guilty, but this is real life inside of real companies.

Worse Than Useless

3 Replies

From the Ask Tom mailbag:

Question:
For me it depends. “Where do you want to be in five years” is probably bordering on useless, but it might be helpful combined with some other questions to find out how the candidate has met their personal career goals in the past.

Response:
Here is the problem with asking a question that does not provide useful data. The problem is the candidate’s response.

  • I want to be president of the company.
  • I want to be a contributing member of the team, in the exact role you are hiring for.
  • I want to have your job.
  • I want to retire.

Here’s the thing. I don’t know what any of these responses mean. And they don’t have anything to do with the accountabilities or the skill set of the role. So, I have to figure out what these responses mean. As the interviewer, I now have to make an interpretation. As the interviewer, as soon as I start to interpret, as soon as I begin to play amateur psychologist, I am in trouble.

Let’s see. What does it mean that the candidate wants to be president of our company in five years?

I DON’T KNOW. But the candidate said it, so I have to put it somewhere in my head, and it’s not even a data point. It’s an unverifiable statement with an interpretation. I, now, have this junk rattling around in my brain that doesn’t make any sense.

And I have other junk rattling around in there as well.

  • First impressions
  • Stereotypes
  • The way the candidate dressed
  • That the candidate was nervous
  • That their resume had a time gap in it
  • That the candidate only worked six months in their last job

And these are elements that I cannot help but think about. As the interviewer, I cannot help that I carry stereotypes in my head. We all do. That’s why I have to have 50-80 written questions and ask two drill down questions for every written question, so I have 150 other data points to balance off my stereotype.

As the interviewer, I have enough junk in my head, so why would I ask an idiotic question to add to it?

Most Idiotic Question

2 Replies

From the Ask Tom mailbag:

Question:
I have only been reading your blog for a couple months so bear with me for the inane question. I was curious when I read today’s post why you consider the question “Where do you want to be in 5 years?” the most idiotic question you could ask in an interview. I have been in quite a few interviews and have heard (and asked) some idiotic questions in an attempt to learn how to identify good talent and a good fit to my team so I would love to get your take on this interview question.

Response:
I have a very strong bias in the interview stage of recruiting (and I have to give Barry Shamis the credit). First, I believe that preparation is the key to gaining enough information to make a better hiring decision. But it’s not enough to gain a higher quantity of data. The quality of the data is as important.

So, what data is helpful and what data is NOT helpful, even damaging.

Helpful

  • Real facts.
  • Verifiable facts.
  • Real, verifiable facts about past performance.
  • Real, verifiable facts that demonstrate the translation of technical knowledge into applied performance (behavior).
  • Real, verifiable facts that demonstrate the translation of attitude and emotion into applied performance (behavior).

Not Helpful

  • Stuff that got made up.
  • Stuff that got exaggerated.
  • Stuff that came from a textbook, but was never actually applied in past performance (behavior).
  • Conjecture.
  • Opinion.
  • Stuff that is not verifiable.
  • Stuff that exists only in the mind of the candidate, with NO basis in reality.

So, look at this question, “Where do you want to be in five years?” Which bucket does it fall into? Helpful? Not Helpful?

Barry Shamis Wrote the Book

5 Replies

Barry Shamis wrote the book. Hiring 3.0 – New Rules for the New Economy.

Why You Should Care

If you follow this blog, you know I have extreeeemely strong bias for hiring strategy. You are well aware of my insistence on 50-80 written prepared questions going into the interview. You know about the most idiotic question ever asked in an interview. (Where do you plan to be five years from now?)

Barry Shamis is responsible for all that. And now he has captured it all in his newest book – Hiring 3.0.

Don’t take my word for it, just buy it. Best single book on the planet. It beats them all, including Top Grading. Here’s the link. Hiring 3.0.

Pay Now or Pay Later

1 Reply

“When you were putting this team together, why did you overlook this role on the team?” I asked.

Susan looked at me sideways. “What do you mean?”

“You put this team together, and yet you are dissatisfied with the problem solving capability of the team. They keep running into the same problem over and over, yet always have to go back to square one to solve it.”

“Aw, come on, you know I have a budget. I got the best people I could afford,” she replied.

“This is not a matter of budget, this is a matter of design. I have talked with your team and you have a great bunch of people. But you are missing a role. When you designed your team, you missed a role.”

“What do you mean, designed my team?” Susan asked.

“You thought about the people you needed to do the production, but you never thought about building in one role to make sure production got done. Someone to watch the schedules, create your checklists and see patterns in problems. That is the capability you are missing on your team.”

“Yes, but I can’t afford another person on the team, and besides, I would have to pay more for someone with that capability,” she defended.

“You are going to pay for this role anyway. Without this role, you will have problems that stop the line, re-work on elements that have to be done twice and overtime. You are paying for this role anyway.”

Quit Complaining

1 Reply

Susan was beside herself, “I don’t understand. This is the same problem we had last week with another customer. I got a phone call and two text messages. You would think my team would figure this out. It’s the same problem, all over again.”

“Why don’t they see the problem?” I asked.

“Oh, they see the problem, they just don’t connect it up. They don’t see it’s the same problem as last week.”

“What do you think they should do about it?” I pressed.

“They can’t do anything about it, if they can’t see it’s the same problem. It’s like they have to start all over, back to square one.”

“Like Groundhog Day?”

“Yes, like Groundhog Day,” she replied. “I just wish I could find someone on the team, who could step up and see the pattern, connect the dots together.”

“So, who put this team together?” I smiled.

Susan became very quiet, then finally spoke, “I guess I should quit complaining and find that person.”

What is Necessary

2 Replies

“It’s tough,” Andrea admitted. “During the recession, we significantly reduced our workforce. We had to. Our revenues were down 40 percent, now they are up 10 percent. We are hesitant to raise headcount in the face of optimism. How do we make our decisions about how many people we need in which roles?”

“Here’s a rule of thumb,” I replied. “Don’t organize around your previous metrics of headcount. Go back to ground zero and organize around the work. What is your core work? How is it performed? What does it take to create the output for the demand you forecast? Around your core work, what supervision is necessary? And for the future, who is necessary for planning, for contingencies and alternatives?”

Andrea was nodding. “Strip away all the noise and go back to the core?”

“And only create what is necessary.”

Thinking Differently About the Future

Leave a reply

Ellen didn’t say a word.

“Have you ever wondered why Vision Statements all sound alike?” I asked.

Ellen was still quiet.

“A Vision Statement is designed to describe a picture of the future, and in most companies, a future that is three, four or five years out. The conversation changes. And we aren’t very good at it.”

Ellen moved her head to think.

“We are very good at describing reality in concrete terms. It’s when we begin to think out, into the future, that we begin to stumble. Most Vision Statements sound alike because we have never sat down to think, conceptually, about the future. The conversation changes from a concrete world to a conceptual world and our words begin to fail us.

“Some give up, saying all this planning is useless. It’s never right, things change, so what’s the point?

“Without change, we can get by, short cutting this exercise without much damage. But, in this time, with so much uncertainty, this conceptual planning becomes critical.”

A Completely Different Conversation

1 Reply

“Interesting, our conversation switched from tangible decisions to an analogy about cookies,” I observed.

“Not just cookies, warm cookies,” Ellen corrected me. “It’s easy to plan for a project that will be completed in two weeks. We know who the suppliers are, what materials we need to purchase, what contractors have to be involved. But, when things move further into the future, it gets murky. I can pretty much tell you what our revenues will be in 2011, but the real question, is what decisions have to be made this year to position us for 2013-2014?”

“You’re right,” I agreed. “Something changes about the discussion when we look that far out. In the near term, we can identify, with some accuracy, what is most likely to happen. It is a very concrete discussion. But, the further we go into the future, those tangible items get fuzzy. More than fuzzy. Those concrete elements turn into conceptual elements. And it is a completely different conversation.”

Long-Term Viability

2 Replies

“Therein, lies the dilemma,” I nodded.

“Absolutely,” Ellen replied. “And it’s not just the uncertainty about what might happen with this customer or that project. There are larger things going on. There is uncertainty about taxes and markets. My customers don’t want to make commitments to me and I can’t make commitments to my suppliers.”

“So, what are you going to do? How are you going to plan?” I asked.

Ellen was silent, then finally, thoughtfully, spoke, “It’s not so much about making this decision or that decision. It’s about position. How can we put ourselves in a position that keeps our options open? More than contingency planning. Really keeping long-term moves as viable alternatives.”

“Having your cake and eating it, too?”

Ellen laughed. “It’s not a finished cake. It’s having all the ingredients to make a cake, or a pie, or a dozen warm cookies.”

Computers Cannot Help With This

4 Replies

“Why is this so difficult?” I asked. We were diligently poring over our business plan for 2011.

“Part of it, it’s difficult to look at the larger picture when you have your nose down in the dirt,” Ellen replied. “Our work volume is increasing, but we are not committed to increasing our overhead. We don’t trust the market. This is very complex.”

“But, your company is used to dealing with complexity,” I nodded encouragement.

“This is different. Detailed complexity, we can handle. I mean, we have a staff of computer geniuses, who can write code to handle a hundred thousand details. But, this is different. You can’t write a computer program to deal with this complexity.”

“Why not?” I pressed.

“This complexity is not detailed complexity. And that’s why this planning exercise is so difficult,” Ellen shook her head. “This complexity comes from uncertainty. You cannot write a computer program to deal with things you do not know.”