Sometimes the most simple idea is the most powerful. Such is the case when evaluating the quality of team members. We can boil down the lengthy list of positive and negative attributes into two common-sense factors:
Good points! As supervisors/managers, when formulating action plans, we were always asked that question. There is validity in that. If they had the will to succeed, then they may be given time to improve and/or moved to a different department. If they lacked the will to do the job; we would eventually promote them to customer/s:(.
I have found Marcus Buckingham's and Curt Coffman's book: FIRST BREAK ALL THE RULES, to have some useful perspectives. They argue talent is the most important. The best team members/leaders, tend to be, good at their job/s AND have the drive (will) to overcome any obstacle/s. This said, we still need frontline workers. Perhaps, our best approach is to set people up for success, and EMBRACE THE SUCK. All while ensuring the will is still their:).
Good morning,
Good points! As supervisors/managers, when formulating action plans, we were always asked that question. There is validity in that. If they had the will to succeed, then they may be given time to improve and/or moved to a different department. If they lacked the will to do the job; we would eventually promote them to customer/s:(.
I have found Marcus Buckingham's and Curt Coffman's book: FIRST BREAK ALL THE RULES, to have some useful perspectives. They argue talent is the most important. The best team members/leaders, tend to be, good at their job/s AND have the drive (will) to overcome any obstacle/s. This said, we still need frontline workers. Perhaps, our best approach is to set people up for success, and EMBRACE THE SUCK. All while ensuring the will is still their:).
As always, thank you for your time.