The quality of grit, or a passionate persistence, is considered a priceless attribute when hiring prospective team members. The idea of grit refers to a person’s ability to persevere and remain determined in the face of challenge, adversity, or obstacles. People with grit maintain a commitment to long-term goals and consistently work toward them despite the difficulties that may arise along the way.
"The presumption is that gritty candidates will find a way around the impediments posed by the case or riddle."
My favorite quote from Marcus Aurelius:
"The impediment to action advances action. What stands in the way becomes the way."
Since it was written almost 2,000 years ago, there's something to note about perspective and reframing within the human experience. Regardless of dynamics, that hasn't changed.
When hiring, I look for individuals who expect challenges and adversity and look at it as an opportunity to learn and grow.
For example, I tend to ask them how they plan around a roadmap. I'm listening for anything relative to leaving room for flexibility and contingencies. That tells me they won't be surprised when curveballs are thrown. Then, I ask how they respond to situations where contingencies are enacted, looking for a logical approach to working through a course correction. It's not always that straightforward, but that's where I start.
George Box wrote the famous line, “All models are wrong, some are useful.” His point was that we should focus more on whether something can be applied to everyday life in a useful manner rather than debating endlessly if an answer is correct in all cases.
I always remind myself of this quote before I criticize someone else's prediction model. I'm not going to do that here, but I would like to offer a word of caution: If something sounds too good to be true, then it probably is.
I like what is mentioned toward the end of today's post. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Come up with a list of job relevant questions to ask candidates and do your best to check your cognitive biases (Halo most importantly). If they are an internal hire - try to talk to their peers and people they've worked with on projects in addition to their manager. Sometimes, the best candidates 'on paper' are good at pulling the wool over their manager's eyes, but this tactic doesn't seem to work on peers and teammates in my experience.
I really try to think about the job first, the team second, and then develop a plan to find the best candidate that is available in the talent pool. I guess if I were to choose one thing I tend to try to measure in the majority of hiring decisions, it would be internal locus of control. That is, degree to which people believe that they, as opposed to external forces, have control over the outcome of events in their lives. Do they take responsibility for their actions, or do they blame others when things don't go their way?
I can see you getting to that effectively with a question that about leaving prior jobs in their work history. If you open up the door for them to complain or throw others under the bus...where might the candidate go?
I enjoy the post. My only concern regarding the gritty trait/s is cost-sunk fallacy bias. If we can navigate that energy into another project, business endeavor, relationship, hobby, career, etc... We will likely be better for it.
We all should posses fortitude and perseverance. Let us aspire for the right thing/s though.
"The presumption is that gritty candidates will find a way around the impediments posed by the case or riddle."
My favorite quote from Marcus Aurelius:
"The impediment to action advances action. What stands in the way becomes the way."
Since it was written almost 2,000 years ago, there's something to note about perspective and reframing within the human experience. Regardless of dynamics, that hasn't changed.
When hiring, I look for individuals who expect challenges and adversity and look at it as an opportunity to learn and grow.
Thanks, Josh.
How do you index for that "expect adversity" quality?
For example, I tend to ask them how they plan around a roadmap. I'm listening for anything relative to leaving room for flexibility and contingencies. That tells me they won't be surprised when curveballs are thrown. Then, I ask how they respond to situations where contingencies are enacted, looking for a logical approach to working through a course correction. It's not always that straightforward, but that's where I start.
Copied and pasted from James Clear's website:
George Box wrote the famous line, “All models are wrong, some are useful.” His point was that we should focus more on whether something can be applied to everyday life in a useful manner rather than debating endlessly if an answer is correct in all cases.
I always remind myself of this quote before I criticize someone else's prediction model. I'm not going to do that here, but I would like to offer a word of caution: If something sounds too good to be true, then it probably is.
I like what is mentioned toward the end of today's post. The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Come up with a list of job relevant questions to ask candidates and do your best to check your cognitive biases (Halo most importantly). If they are an internal hire - try to talk to their peers and people they've worked with on projects in addition to their manager. Sometimes, the best candidates 'on paper' are good at pulling the wool over their manager's eyes, but this tactic doesn't seem to work on peers and teammates in my experience.
Is the idea of grit generally in your top three qualities you are trying to surface in interviews?
or do you not index this trait that high?
Always love hearing from you in these areas, David.
I really try to think about the job first, the team second, and then develop a plan to find the best candidate that is available in the talent pool. I guess if I were to choose one thing I tend to try to measure in the majority of hiring decisions, it would be internal locus of control. That is, degree to which people believe that they, as opposed to external forces, have control over the outcome of events in their lives. Do they take responsibility for their actions, or do they blame others when things don't go their way?
I can see you getting to that effectively with a question that about leaving prior jobs in their work history. If you open up the door for them to complain or throw others under the bus...where might the candidate go?
I enjoy the post. My only concern regarding the gritty trait/s is cost-sunk fallacy bias. If we can navigate that energy into another project, business endeavor, relationship, hobby, career, etc... We will likely be better for it.
We all should posses fortitude and perseverance. Let us aspire for the right thing/s though.
Thank you for your time.
Definitely a concern, Joe.
Those who tend to be gritty are the same who would tend to hang on way too long.
Scott Baker touched on that a bit today when talking about this one...
https://twitter.com/i/spaces/1rmxPMdeDdYKN?s=20