Many companies and managers still aren't convinced that hiring people for attitude and quality isn't as important as hiring for what they know and do.
That's one of the reasons I'm getting tired of hearing this word "talent" being used in connection to workers. It is a meaningless term, which brings absolutely nothing to a company.
The reasons I say this is that most of the time, as I said, people are hired for what they know. What's the problem with that? In this information age, what they know now will have no relevance in the very short future; knowledge just changes too fast for it to be a reason for hiring.
Knowledge will be a process that continues on for the duration of a workers lifetime; what is known today couldn't possibly be a competitive advantage, or a reason to hire someone.
Like I read today, "You will hire people for what they know and what they can do. You will most often fire people for who they are." This is absolutely true. Hire those you want to be around, knowledge will have to be added to anybody that is hired, no matter what the position. It's increasingly who someone is that matters, rather than what they offer at the time. What they need to learn isn't hard to add to them, who they are will probably never change. Remember that when looking for your fellow workers.
Sponsored link: The outsourcing every manager requires - Tampa Locksmith
"Hire for attitude, train for skills." I can't remember the name of the banker who said it (apologies to that person), but the phrase seemed worthy of recording. It sums up in six words an awful lot about managing people. And managing people is about 95% of what business is about isn't it?
Posted by: AmericanFl | October 24, 2006 7:23 AM | Permalink to Comment