Hire for Results, Not Potential

"She has so much potential. I just have a good feeling about her."

 It sounds like leadership. It sounds like generosity.

It isn't.

In this episode, I share a client story about a leader who hired the most energetic person in the room and spent the next three months doing two jobs. And a story from my own early career, sitting on a hiring panel at a post-secondary institution, watching a room of intelligent people convince themselves that enthusiasm was enough to teach and that we could build the instinct this candidate didn't have. We were wrong. The people who paid the cost were the students who had no say in the decision.

This episode names the pattern clearly: hiring for potential over demonstrated results is one of the most common mistakes I see. And most leaders don't know they're doing it until they're doing two jobs and wondering how they got there. 

I name the four things leaders tell themselves when a hire isn't working, why each one feels logical in the moment, and what it costs when none of them turn out to be enough.

I also share what hiring for results looks like, not as a concept, but as a set of concrete questions to ask before the job is posted and before anyone sits down across from you.

In this episode:

• The 4 things leaders tell themselves when a hire isn't working and why none of them answer the only question that matters
• Why "quick learner" can be a warning sign, not a credential
• The question that tells you whether a struggling hire is a performance problem or a fit problem
• What hiring for results looks like before the job is posted, in the interview, and at 30, 60, and 90 days
• The difference between settled and comfortable plus why one of them tells you it's time to have the conversation

This week's permission: You are allowed to hire for what the role requires right now, not what you hope someone will grow into. Hiring for results isn't demanding. It's honest. And it's the kindest thing you can do for both of you.