I recently tested two women for a Corporate Accounting Manager job for a private equity firm that owns several companies. Both were soundly qualified and made a credible interview impression. However, when I asked each one about their weaknesses and how they deal with them, they both cited experiences of not being taken seriously because of being women, particularly in male dominated industries. One mentioned that she is short in stature which may have added to the problem. One was in her early 30’s and the pother in her late 30’s. Each noted at least one other weakness, but it was surprising to me that being female was mentioned by either one of them as a personal shortcoming per se. That said, it must have felt real for them, but more from the standpoint of being a physical disability or handicap.

 

Watch: https://youtu.be/qj-ECmxMk5M 

As you all likely know, The President of the United States is the CEO of our country. I’ve tested a lot of CEO candidates for small to mid-sized companies, with annual sales ranging from $50M to $1.5B. These company sizes are obviously not as big as the U.S.A. However, I honestly asked myself if I could recommend President Trump as a hired gun CEO for any of my client companies. My honest answer is clearly no.

With all due respect to his supporters,  I just perceive President Trump as too toxic and divisive to run a typical private or public company. Believe me, I have recommended candidates I have not particularly liked for some clients based on objective testing and the client’s needs and goals at a particular time. But my perception of President Trump is just too polarizing and negative. I’d prefer someone who I and others would perceive as more grounded, principled, magnanimous, and inclusive, but also inquisitive, capable of systemic thought, adaptive, direct, and decisive. Some Charisma is preferred but not required. I wouldn’t want to have half of the workforce feeling engaged and excited, and the other half feeling angry, intimidated, excluded and passive aggressive. 

That said, no matter how I feel, there are millions of voters who perceive President Trump very positively: He has great charisma. He inspires people who have lost faith in government. He dominates the media with great persuasive skills. He challenges and explodes cultural norms in ways that excite many people. He can divert people’s attention on a dime from issues that could hurt him. His transactional policies attract many voters. He’s often quite humorous and clever in the ways he diminishes and denigrates his adversaries. He has great energy, drive and stamina. And he acts and makes decisions according to his best interests, his MAGA philosophy and the loyalty of his base, and doesn’t really care what others think (many admire that). In essence, he remains a formidable opponent for any Dem contender.

 

Watch https://www.transformationtalkradio.com/watch.html 

In prior episodes we talked about the important role of hiring teams in (1) Clarifying job specifications (2) Evaluating candidates and (3) Contributing to the best hiring decisions. We’ve also discussed teams that worked well and where they faltered. And we got into various candidate psych profiles and whether they were recommended by this psychologist and accepted by the hiring teams.

 Like any inquisitive and successful entrepreneur, our host Dr. Pat has been discovering some compelling hiring principles through her engagement in my episodes and her shows with other organization and leadership mavens. So today, we’re going to have Dr. Pat share (1) What she has learned about hiring teams and the hiring process that has intrigued her (2)  What decisions these discoveries have prompted for hiring folks into her company, Transformation Talk Radio and (3) What questions remain for her to answer so she can  create a great hiring model and process for her company.

 

Watch: https://youtu.be/iC5POyXmy5o 

Last week, we talked about the challenge of self-reinvention and how it can accelerate one’s personal and career success. We also linked partial or total self-reinvention to adapting to the new world of AI. Recently, I had the opportunity to assess a candidate for a VP Operations at the media company I’ve cited previously The job has an AI emphasis; its purpose is to streamline operations, enhance software products and boost profitable sales. I had to determine whether this candidate has the characteristics and competencies to shape an operations and AI vision, and influence related changes in a matrix leadership environment.

Watch https://youtu.be/QGzSVpO5GYI

In the last episode, we discussed the real possibility that an SVP Business Services candidate for a media company could be well into the exciting process of transforming himself from a business support guy to a business leader. Today we’re going to discuss what can prompt a person to seek and achieve a fundamental change for the better. This topic is particularly important for professionals, managers and executives considering the major adaptation challenges posed by the quickly emerging world of AI.

Watch https://youtu.be/TvrykAWK4-E

A couple of episodes ago, I discussed my assessing a candidate for SVP Business Services for a media company that provides insights to businesses to help protect lives and assets, stimulate sales growth, and operate more cost-effectively.

The job involves developing the sales, marketing, and product program, engaging executive peers and inspiring a program consensus, and then leading program execution in a matrix environment without direct authority.

I didn’t recommend the candidate I assessed because of a background and personality that stressed business support over direct program leadership. Per this recommendation, the company passed on the candidate and recently asked me to vet another person.

 

Watch: https://youtu.be/JTLYLcmCP4c

Back several episodes, I described the challenge of assessing candidates for a Sales Engineer position for a company that makes synchronized clocks for customers who need accurate times throughout their facilities like schools, airports, and hospitals. The company employs a rather rigorous 2-week product training program followed by a proficiency test that can end the tenure of new hires quickly. The first candidate I tested for the firm showed a 130+ IQ with a good sales personality. The company selected him and he’s doing great. Another candidate I didn’t recommend for sales showed similar intellectual prowess. While he made it through the training program, his lack of sales ability caught up with him in six months.

The company uses a screening test that includes mechanical aptitude, math skills, and verbal reasoning ability. It’s timed and taken online. Until recently, I thought it had good content and face validity.

My test of intellect incudes practical or tactical reasoning, conceptual or strategic aptitude, and impromptu math skill. I deliver these tests orally and the candidate has to deliver the answers orally. The practical and conceptual tests allow me to prompt or coach candidates: “Tell me more; what do you mean by that; explain further; give me another reason if you can.”

On the math part, I can’t prompt but I can repeat questions as long as the candidate gets the answer within the (mostly) 60-second time limit.

Since the client used a product-related aptitude test that looked pretty good, I basically had been using my test to project whether candidates can orchestrate the sales process from inception to closing the deal. My criteria had been an IQ score of 116 or the 86th percentile for the general population.

I wasn’t focusing on candidates passing the two-week product training because the client’s test seemed to cover that piece. At least until recently when two candidates I recommended as adequate Sales Engineer prospects failed the training proficiency exam and were fired after the first 2.5 weeks. Both candidates passed the client’s aptitude test and scored 118 IQ’s on my test.

 

Watch https://www.transformationtalkradio.com/watch.html 

During the last few episodes, we’ve been discussing the benefits of a good hiring team in developing job specs as a foundation for recruiting, evaluating, and selecting successful managers and executives.  I was recently asked to do an executive assessment for a media company that (in part) provides information to businesses to help them protect assets and people’s lives, minimize costs, and maximize sales opportunities. It’s been a successful segment that needs acceleration, The position is Senior Vice President. Business Intelligence, a B to B program development and execution role.  In prior years, Business Intelligence had its own sales, marketing, technical, and operations groups reporting to a profit center GM. Now these groups are under separate functional leaders in a new matrix environment. So, the only people directly managed by the SVP are project managers and an inside service and sales support team. The job specs focused on the SVP’s needs to be a great collaborator in both program development and implementation. Initially, I’m thinking that collaborative team play is a key element along with strong program analytic, development, organization, and coordination skills. However, the hiring team’s job description used words like “spearhead and drive the business” which sounded more like direct business leadership. The CEO helped me get clearer the organization structure change and the matrix emphasis.

The candidate’s background emphasized organizational and executive support but not direct business driving positions. That said, there was noteworthy success in business analytics related to mergers and acquisitions and playing a support role in orchestrating these organizational growth deals. In the most recent job, he had some influence in getting his company to create a separate business division of a previously integrated enterprise. He was appointed to a Chief Commercial job where he supported the Sales VP in shaping and negotiating sales contracts at the executive level. The candidate also had nice experience in SaaS companies, a similar to my client.

Watch https://youtu.be/gOnzkSmSUMg

Last week we described the hiring team to be led by the VPHR for a manufacturing company. We can say that the company custom designs, fabricates, and installs outer glass walls for office buildings throughout the U.S. The hiring team includes Dick Cheney, CFO; Nancy Pelosi, VP General Counsel; Martha Stewart, VP of Marketing; Snoop Dogg, VP of Sales; Bill Clinton, CFO; and Anne Richards, Plant Manager. They have established the job specifications and will each interview a candidate that was sourced by an executive search firm. Our show will focus on one of the interviews conducted by Soop Dogg, the VP Sales.

Watch https://youtu.be/hvgGS2F1swM

Following on to the last episode, you are the VPHR for a manufacturing company. The Board and CEO have chartered you to manage the search and selection of a new Snr. VP Operations. A key part of the role will be to (1) specify AI priorities, (2) secure CEO and Board approval, (3) ensure projects are developed and completed in a timely and cost/quality manner, and (4) effectively lead program execution. Per our last recommendation, you have selected a rather high profile, high powered, highly talented, and diverse hiring team who you will first lead through the process of identifying key job specifications: (1) Job Expectations) (2) Experience and Competency Requirements and (3) Essential Personal Characteristics (relates to the AI executive profile I recommended in the last Episode). (Remember, clear job specs are important for the hiring team, executive recruiter, and the assessment psychologist.)

Watch here: https://youtu.be/8T_-1w5a6Lw