Answering Stupid Questions

A friend of mine recently made a post in their blog about the stupid questions that high school students sometimes ask. The truth as (as is shown by some of the questions the students ask) is that yes, there is such a thing as a stupid question. We only tell people who ask stupid questions that there aren't stupid questions to make them feel better.

As a manager, have you been asked a stupid question? Of course you have. We all have. At a recent position, there was one member of the sales team that routinely asked stupid questions, usually asking me to explain something that I had just spent the last hour training her on.

She definitely got on my last nerve, and though I thought that I his it, everyone around me knew when I was training her just from my change of demeanor. The only saving grace in this was that it wasn't just me...she was this way with everyone, to the point where people cringed at the very mention of her name. She was, without a doubt, in the category of stupid.

And it was my fault.

It wasn't my fault that she was not a relatively intelligent human being; it was my fault that she got a job with this company. It was my fault for not screening her more thoroughly.

In the words of the immortal Mr. Miyagi, "Best way to block punch: no be there." The best way to stop performance issues is to not hire people who are going to be problematic. Simple enough, but rarely followed.

Most managers rely on the time-honored approach of the interview process. This usually begins with screening some resumes. This is followed by a phone interview, and then a face-to-face interview with one or more managers. Sometimes, there will be a second interview. A hiring decision is made, the new hire comes on board, and within six months, the hiring manager knows regret that can only be equated with eating bad Mexican food from a shady sidewalk vendor.

Other businesses rely strictly on testing to make hiring decision. This is excellent for determining a candidate's skill set, but does little in determining a candidate's fit with the company and the team.

The real way to weed out the, oh, let's call them "weird" ones, is to not only use a combination approach (both behavioral-based interview questions and objective testing), but include a sample of their work. For example, in a sales position, ask them for a sample proposal, a demonstration their cold-calling technique, and references from their customers. Any salesperson worth their salt will be able to cold call you, show you their boilerplate proposal, and offer a list of customers who are happily satisfied.

We (one of the other managers and I) did not do this last step. We had the aforementioned candidate interview with both of us and take a test, but did not ask for other proof of her accomplishments. Turns out that she was nothing but a performance issue from the start, one that not only monopolized our time, but did not sell much of anything for 6 months. Had we been more thorough in the interview process using the above techniques, we could have avoided the entire mess, and who knows, hired a salesperson that could...well, you know, sell.

"Patience, young Skywalker"

Random observation: As I'm sitting here in Starbucks, I am wondering to myself: how many covers of Ah-Ha's "Take On Me" do we really need?

I am finding that one of my "pain points", to use an awful sales training term, is being pushed repeatedly as of late: I am not what most would consider a patient person. I have a proclivity for instant gratification, that when I have an idea, I want to see it come to fruition yesterday. As it turns out, starting a business requires some ample amounts of the stuff.

I have the basic frame work laid for Auspex, have started some marketing and some networking, but have yet to see any of these efforts bare fruit. I am trying to take the Jeffrey Gitomer approach and grab attention through networking, but I am finding this an exceedingly difficult chore. Whether this is because I am not terribly good at it, or because it requires some degree of patience, or a combination, I do not know.

One such networking group seemed like it would have helped put Auspex on the right track, but then there was a catch: they wanted $300 for an annual membership, $100 for a start up fee, and $15 per week for the weekly lunch meetings. So, in total, over $1100, plus I would have to turn in a certain number of referrals each week to maintain membership. Not that I'm doubting the efficacy of this approach, but the fact that they wanted the entire membership fee up front, rather than providing for a payment plan, completely put this out of reach.

This has lead me to two thoughts this week about effective leadership:

1. Leaders must be patient.
2. Leader must know when to stop pouring money into something.

The second one is actually much more delicate than one would think, because in some circumstances, such as joining a networking and referral group, the expenditure may be more of an investment, and may pay out dividends much higher than the investment. But, at best, it is still an educated guess with a certain probability of failure. At this time, with no other source of income and with the current expenditures just getting the infrastructure in place, I decided not to drop the additional $400 up front. Perhaps at a later date it will be a possibility, but that kind of spending would undoubtedly have repercussions that resonated beyond the small business and into my personal finances; repercussions that, were the investment not to pay off, would result in a serious problem meeting normal household financial committments.

Its the patience end of things that I need the real work. I need to work on being able to just wait and not expect instant results in certain circumstances. I think that most managers/leaders need to, if they haven't already mastered it, develop this skill and dedicate time to its cultivation. It is one thing to expect projects and tasks completed by a hard, yet resonable deadline; it is another thing entirely to demand instantaneous results.

Where patience plays its largest role is in employee development. This can and will be the most time-consuming task a leader will undertake, and the results will be subtle and gradual. Where most leaders fall short it when, after teaching a new skill or having a conversation about performance, they expect immediate and sustained improvement in performance. In most cases, not only is this not the typical outcome, it is also unlikely that the employee is able to perform to that standard. The patient leader needs to realize that to build real teams, to develop the strongest employees, that there is a certain investment of time, and that requires patience.