Work context and Ideal Employee image: Survey results

I am delighted to announce that the article describing my dissertation research project titled:

The ideal employee: Context and leaders’ implicit follower theories

was accepted for publication at the Leadership & Organization Development Journal.

What is this study about?

In a nutshell, we wanted to find out if a leader's perception of the work context shapes her preferences for ideal employee traits. We are delighted to have found clear links between managers' perception of certain environmental factors and their most desired employee traits.

Background: Most leaders and managers have an image of an (ideal) employee in mind. This image is like a summary of prototypical employee qualities which complement formal qualifications and skills.

The crux with this employee prototype is that managers may – unintentionally - rely more on it than on their real-life experiences with actual employees. This becomes an issue particularly during critical manager-employee interactions such as interviewing, hiring & firing, performance ratings etc. – in good ways and not so good ways.

Why is this relevant for organizations? 

In short, managers manage their people partly on the basis of their ideal employee image. This means that many personnel related decision processes such as performance reviews or hiring & firing are accompanied by managers' prototypical employee in mind. The knowledge that organizational context might shape this image and influence their expectations is relevant because it can explain alignment or misalignment between organizational strategy and personnel decisions.  

For example, imagine an organization whose top leaders want to create a culture of creative innovation, adaptability and flexibility to the market place. Their managers and supervisors, however, perceive the daily operations as highly bureaucratic and rule-oriented - seemingly killing creativity. In reaction to their perception of organizational processes, they developed an ‘ideal employee’ image which is - contrary to creative innovation - based on efficiency, routine work, strictly following directions and maintaining the status quo.

Are these manager going to hire highly creative individuals?

Are their performance reviews going to be about the type of innovation the top leaders have in mind?

Are they likely to support their employees in exploring new options?

(Maybe, but maybe not.)

Q & A:

In 2012 we asked 182 active leaders, managers and supervisors in several for-profit companies (e.g. Autoliv, MENLO Innovations, Zingermans’ and many more) in the USA to rate certain employee traits (e.g. hardworking, excited, loyal, productive, happy, reliable) and behaviors (expressing an emphasis on creative or efficiency-oriented innovation).

This is part of what we found:

      What are the qualities of an ‘Ideal Employee’?

Overall, an 'deal employee' is a loyal, reliable team player and shows behaviors that display both creativity and efficiency.

      Do leaders agree on the most critical and desirable traits and behaviors of employees?

No. The ‘ideal employee’ does not exist; leaders perceive their work environments differently and favor different employee qualities.

     What is more important in an employee: creativity or efficiency?

Depends! Older leaders prefer a balance of efficiency and creativity in employees, but managers of larger teams have an ideal employee image driven by efficiency. No differences, however, between female and male leaders.

      How does managers’ work context shape their view on an employee’s ideal qualities?

Managers who think their work context is rather formalized and rule-driven prefer efficient workers who are excited about their jobs, happy and outgoing.

Those who perceive the market conditions more as dynamic and fast-changing, on the other hand, like their employees to be creative, but also loyal, reliable team workers.

How can this knowledge serve organizations?

The organizations who participated in our study received a summary of their leaders’ “ideal employee profile” in terms of personal traits and work behaviors relating to creative or efficient innovation. They can now compare their leaders' 'ideal employee' profile with their strategic direction and see if their managers are aligned in their personnel decisions.  

Practical steps for how to manage leaders' 'ideal employee' image for a more aligned management of new and existing employees will be one additional focus in my dissertation.

For questions, comments and feedback please contact me at andrea.derler@gmail.com

 Reference:

Derler A. & Weibler J. (forthcoming). The ideal employee: Context and implicit follower theories. Leadership and Organization Development Journal.

Why Chase the Purple Squirrel?

Where to start in our reflections about the current hiring paralysis that affects organizations?  With the manager who will not hire anyone who does not bring a pen to the interview? (He is in the food industry). Or with a company that was unable to fill a standard engineering position despite having 25,000 applicants*? Or, maybe with the stubborn reliance on gut-decisions that often run against better knowledge and – job descriptions in general?

I start with the hiring manager and their mental schema of a prototypical dream candidate, the “purple squirrel”. One who thinks and acts the way they expect, require and desire. In short: their "Ideal Employee", who embodies a plethora of (often) unrealistic expectations towards real people. People who might never be perfect, but who could become pretty close to perfect. If they only let them.

 Don't chase the purple squirrel

Every single manager I have ever asked admitted that they have a certain ideal image of a perfect employee. While there is nothing wrong with high expectations and a sense of perfection, it becomes a problem if it hinders our judgment about others. I strongly believe that today’s hiring problems such as the perceived lack of qualified candidates and the use of exhaustive interview processes are in part due to the way hiring managers consider applicants. 

Sure, if we look for a purple squirrel in a hoard of brown squirrels, our search will be unsuccessful. Our response to this initial frustration is to want to make them all purple. We either reject the brown ones, or torture them with (ridiculous) questions just to make sure we get the candidate closest to purple. But what if we never find it?

4 steps for a better hiring process

If you find yourself with unrealistic expectations towards new job applicants or existing employees, try this:

     1.      Functional aspects test:  What do you actually need from your employee?

Focus on the business objectives at hand and define the skill set and required qualifications of employees as precisely as possible. Leave out all unnecessary qualities that are not absolutely crucial. Write a short and well-thought-out job description. Be reasonable. (For example, does a head chef really need a pen to be a great cook?)

     2.      Reality Check: What is the potential impact of your Ideal Employee image on applicants?

Be aware of your Ideal Employee image. Do not allow your real candidate pale beside your imaginary creative-and-efficient-and-independent-and-team-working imagined superhero/heroine. (Remember, none of the 25,000 applicants in our above example ever had a chance).    

     3.      Re-Adjust Focus: What is the goal that you want to accomplish?

Put the emotional aspect on the back burner. Don’t wait for the magical buzz between yourself and the applicant but focus on the things you want to accomplish through and with them (see point 1.). Do not get carried away with personal traits too much (you don’t want to make friends but need a great business associate).

      4.     Create the right context for Your Real-Ideal Employee

People can be made into great employees: in an amazing work place they will thrive, in a healthy organizational culture they will grow, through your leadership style and management skills they will become what you need. 

Bottom line: if your old strategies didn't help you find great employees, try to change your mind. Think forward, not backward: allow future employees to be molded into your vision instead of forcing them into something they don't even know yet. It will make your work relationships and - hiring processes - easier.

References:

* Cappelli, P. (2012). Why Good People Can’t Get Jobs: The Skills Gap and What Companies Can Do About It. Wharton Digital Press.

** http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple_squirrel

Leaders' 4 Steps to Managing Expectations

Hand to heart: have you ever found yourself a little disillusioned with the people who work for you? Slightly disappointed with the quality of their work, or their attitude, or maybe their lack of fresh ideas and commitment? Maybe you wondered what your life as leader would be like if only X was more like Y, and Z was a little less X... If you had found the ideal employee. Someone who is everything and does everything the way you require and expect it. Maybe you actually know a real-life ideal employee, and sometimes hope that others would become just like them. At the very least, a little bit.

It's OK to have ideals, to know precisely what it is that you are looking for in your team members. However, be aware that these ideals can create expectations towards your real-life employees, expectations that might not be fulfilled and leave you - as their manager - empty, frustrated and disappointed. And this might affect your leadership effectiveness and relationships with them. 

So, how can leaders manage their expectations towards their team members?

Maybe this helps:

My Ideal Car: an analogy

This is my ideal car (true story):

If I had a Ford Shelby GT 500, this is how I would treat it:

Wash and clean it by hand every week Check oil regularly Cover up at night when parked outside Allow no other driver No eating/drinking inside car Regular professional maintenance

Now, the reality check. This is my actual car:

Do I treat a 1993 Toyota Camry like I would the Ford Shelby? Let's check:

Ford Shelby	Toyota Camry
Wash and clean it by hand every week	Irregularly
Check oil regularly	No
Cover up at night when parked outside	Never
Allow no other driver	Always lend to friends
No eating/drinking inside car	Both permitted
Regular professional maintenance	Never

 

Why should I? (It’s not a Shelby!)

      Still, there is something wrong with this answer. Do I treat my real car bad because it’s not a Shelby? Or do I treat it bad because I think it’s not worth it? (either way, I treat my car bad).

Bottom line: I keep imagining my ideal car but the reality is: I’m stuck with my less-than ideal car. And this disappoints me every time I look at the Camry and think of the Shelby.

Question: How can I manage my constant disappointment with Camry, the less-than ideal car? (By changing my mind.)

4 steps to managing unrealistic expectations:

     

1.       Functional aspects test:  What do I actually want from a car?

 

        

Transportation

Reliability

Price efficiency

Low maintenance

 
How do both Shelby and Camry stack up when I look at my actual requirements?

Requirements	Toyota Camry	Ford Shelby
Transportation	yes	yes
Reliability	yes	unknown
Price efficiency	yes	no
Low maintenance	yes	no

  

This is astonishing! My less-than ideal car does everything I really need, and my ideal car won't deliver!

         2.  Reality Check: What is the potential impact of my behaviors on Camry?

(Camry gets treated badly, so his performance will deteriorate, affecting our relationship to the worse).

   

          3. Re-Adjust Focus: What is really important? What is it that I need? 

Re-define actual requirements according to goal.

Become aware of ideal-reality bias. (Ouch. What am I doing with poor Camry?)

         4. Create the right context: Eradicate superfluous expectations 

Focus on the goal.

Display behaviors that instill desired outcomes in Camry. (Treat him well!!)

Managing Ideals Effectively can improve employee and team effectiveness

Research shows that positive expectations can improve employee performance (Pygmalion effect). But do we ever consider the possibility that we might expect too much from others? (e.g. is it fair from me to expect my Camry to be a Shelby?)

If the answer is yes, do we really think that the constant pressure of unrealistic expectations makes us better leaders, managers, team mates or subordinates? 

Quite the opposite, I propose.

This car analogy shows that it’s not some miraculous dynamic that intervenes and creates destructive outcomes following high or unrealistic expectations. It’s our very own attitude and subsequent behavior towards a ‘suboptimal’ other that might just make the big difference. 

If we can change our mindset by following these 4 steps of managing ideals, we can

·          

• Learn to focus on the functional/positive side of what we have instead of wishing for an ideal,

• Understand that it is our own behavior caused by unrealistic expectations that might have an impact on other people's performance and our relationships, and

• Create the context for desired employee behaviors in our capacity as leaders.

(And yes, I  still think of the Ford Shelby GT 500 as my ideal car. But I treat my Camry much better these days.)