domingo, 17 de marzo de 2013

Would HR hire by today's standards either Lincoln or Churchill?

My dear readers,
Due to popular demand, I have translated my own blog post into English. Please feel free to share.
Just imagine what might have been the world if Abraham Lincoln or Winston Churchill had not reached their Presidencies? What might have been the world without the Beatles, Elvis Presley, Steve Jobs, Walt Disney or Oprah Winfrey? What have all these historical characters in common?
Steve Jobs was exiled from his own company for “lack of leadership and vision …”
The Beatles, as well as Elvis Presley were ignored for years by the major record labels saying they were “a bunch of crazy rhythmless boys without any musical sense, zero chance of success …”
Walt Disney was fired from a newspaper “for lack of creativity …” and in their first incursions in order to raise funds to create the “amusement park”, was crossed out as “deluded”…
Oprah Winfrey, as far as I know is the richest women of the world that left the poorest district of Chicago, once was dismissed off the local newscast since she had “no television presence …”
Sir Richard Branson is the owner of one of the few airlines (one of 2 in the US) without losses, owner of the only private space agency of the world … Know that he had to leave school by dyslexia and learning problems!
Lincoln, a mostly self-taught lawyer, virtually without prior experience of public positions, becomes president of the United States almost by a miracle, abolishes slavery with no precedents, in a country divided … Today, with all the statistical methods, background, political means, etc. … any of you think that he would have come to the presidency? AND stating that it is not due to a lack of merit or talent…
By the standards of Human Resources Departments today, Lincoln would be 100% unhireable: self-taught, zero credentials, fewer certificates, almost zero political experience and much less prior military background…
Churchill on the other hand, military first, then a journalist and then many political posts, many of these serious problems, practically never managed to be re-elected, bounding from stall to stall and wrapped up in scandals, the largest being the massacre of Gallipoli in the first world war, the scandalous opposition against Gandhi and the independence of India and the support in favor of the abdication of King Edward VIII caused serious discontent and “exile” of the parliament.
By the standards of Human Resources Departments today, Churchill would be 100% unhireable pretty much for anything, much less as prime minister of all positions … hoping  never holding onto anything, noisy, contrarian, with all his prior history somewhat questionable …
Personally I thank you, thank you to all the opponents of all the great minds and personalities, because without all of you, great minds would have never found their own sense of persistence, had they not found their way, their destination to finally change the course of mankind … All the great innovations are born of the opposition, so thank you.
It is my observation that the great common factor of all the visionaries is that are terrible opposition of minds beached in the comfort zone, or founded in inertia. fears, panics, terrors, pride, and of course with a strong chance that they are almost all of human resources or recruitment areas …
In my personal experience, in my small corner of the world I have achieved and broken paradigms, displayed the talent behind the credentials and experience and got to hire those who turned out to be, in their great majority great people. Many a times without the specific experience but with great and more than enough desire, vision and talent … just what Lincoln, Churchill and all the fore mentioned did have.
So it’s not important previous experience or credentials or certificates? I am not stupid, of course these are important, but it is far from everything. Is talent measurable? If you are clear, yes it's measurable. The zeal or the desire? Certainly! But, still not by machines! RH complains that does not have the time, and that it is more efficient to machines to select the candidates only on the basis of their credentials and experience … efficient? Yes, of course.
On the other hand, there are studies of Stanford, Oxford and Harvard where they say that 80% of the time of the departments of human resources is wasted by correcting their own errors of recruitment … 80% According to Alan Weiss, a highly respected colleague said that, he would disappear all HR departments off the planet … I have not reached these radical ends with my clients, yet... But why does nobody else do anything about??? If you are still questioning if what I say may be exaggerated, just check Harvard's post here: http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2013/02/your_job_ads_are_driving_talen.html
Answer as to why HR has allowed their own system to get broken: Fear & power. most destructive of combinations.

“Idiot is the one who repeats actions expecting different results” – Albert Einstein

And you may be wondering dear reader, what does all this have to do with innovation? Well, the innovation lies in doing new things, or old things in a different manner, and it is my belief that it is time, well overdue, there is an urgent need to make sweeping changes to the system, go, if you want to recruit and retain the best talent, that today, they are going between the fingers and neither account have been given … so seen too few in HR even strive to find it and accept that the system is broken…. I know.
Corollary to my original post: Why if we are certain that HR Would never hire the best minds on the planet, game changers, breakthrough talent, as I've shown before, Why do we have them choosing and hiring for our own companies?

Is this problem fixable? yes. Call me and we'll discuss.
just a though...