Magic Of Implementation Session 1

Superior Performance- The Information GapSuperior Performance- The Information Gap

Session #1Session #1

The right people can be the difference between

extinction & survival, profit & loss…

The right people can be the difference between

extinction & survival, profit & loss…

…Seem too big a statement?…Seem too big a statement?

Why does this matter?Why does this matter?Unskilled / Semi-skilled ‘Average’ workers output = 19% more than ‘Non-producers’ ‘Superior’ workers output = 19% more than ‘Average’ ‘Superior’ workers output = 38% more than Non-producers’

Skilled ‘Average’ workers output = 32% more than ‘Non-producers’ ‘Superior’ workers output = 32% more than ‘Average’ ‘Superior’ workers output = 64% more than Non-producers’

Management / Professional ‘Average’ workers output = 48% more than ‘Non-producers’ ‘Superior’ workers output = 48% more than ‘Average’ ‘Superior’ workers output = 96% more than ‘Non-producers’

Unskilled / Semi-skilled ‘Average’ workers output = 19% more than ‘Non-producers’ ‘Superior’ workers output = 19% more than ‘Average’ ‘Superior’ workers output = 38% more than Non-producers’

Skilled ‘Average’ workers output = 32% more than ‘Non-producers’ ‘Superior’ workers output = 32% more than ‘Average’ ‘Superior’ workers output = 64% more than Non-producers’

Management / Professional ‘Average’ workers output = 48% more than ‘Non-producers’ ‘Superior’ workers output = 48% more than ‘Average’ ‘Superior’ workers output = 96% more than ‘Non-producers’

Source: “The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings”

Psychological Bulletin, Sept 1998, Vol. 124, No. 2, pp 262-274.

Imagine yours is a small company with…

Imagine yours is a small company with…

50 Unskilled / Semi-skilled workers

25 Skilled Workers10 Managers

50 Unskilled / Semi-skilled workers

25 Skilled Workers10 Managers

X 0.19 =

Average Salary?

Your cost per ‘Average’

# in this category

X = Unskilled

Skilled

Total Exposure if all ‘average’ Total Exposure if all ‘average’ (total i + ii + iii)(total i + ii + iii)

(i)

Management

X 0.32 =

X = (ii)

X 0.48 =

X = (iii)

= (iv)

Cost of ‘Average’ vs. ‘Superior’ PerformersCost of ‘Average’ vs. ‘Superior’ Performers

Your cost if all in this category ‘average’

$20,000 $3,800 50 $190,000

Percentage of salary investment at riskPercentage of salary investment at risk =

$40,000 $12,800 25 $320,000

$60,000 $28,000 10 $280,000

$790,000

30%

ImplicationsImplications These figures are not ‘worst case’: If any or all are

below average, the loss for that position is doubled – but so is the potential for improvement

Unless all your people are ‘superior’ performers, you are losing money unnecessarily

Regardless how large or small your organization the potential losses are relatively large

Every time you move performance in any single job from ‘average’ to ‘superior’ you have a measurable financial impact

These figures are not ‘worst case’: If any or all are below average, the loss for that position is doubled – but so is the potential for improvement

Unless all your people are ‘superior’ performers, you are losing money unnecessarily

Regardless how large or small your organization the potential losses are relatively large

Every time you move performance in any single job from ‘average’ to ‘superior’ you have a measurable financial impact

To ensure that every “people” decision – whether hiring, placement, promotional or development is aimed at

promoting ‘superior’ performance in at least one of your positions

To ensure that every “people” decision – whether hiring, placement, promotional or development is aimed at

promoting ‘superior’ performance in at least one of your positions

Your ChallengeYour Challenge

When do people perform at a ‘superior’

level?

“It’s not experience – or college degrees –

or other accepted factors…

…(it) hinges on fit with

the job.”

Source: Herbert M. Greenberg and Jeanne Greenberg, “Job Matching for Better Sales Performance,” Harvard Business Review,

Vol. 58, No. 5.

6 Months After Hire:

“…persons who had been matched outperformed to a statistically significant

degree, those who had not been matched…”

14 Months After Hire:

“Moreover, the differences widened after 14 months”

Source: Herbert M. Greenberg and Jeanne Greenberg, “Job Matching forBetter Sales Performance,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 58, No. 5.

Source: Herbert M. Greenberg and Jeanne Greenberg, “Job Matching forBetter Sales Performance,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 58, No. 5.

WithoutWithoutJob Job

MatchMatch

They also stay longer – saving a fortune on recruitment costs!

WithWithJob Job

MatchMatch

24%24%28%28%

5%5%8%8%

Low Turnover IndustryLow Turnover Industry

High Turnover IndustryHigh Turnover Industry

% left / fired after 6 months% left / fired after 6 months 46%46% % left / fired after 14 months 57%% left / fired after 14 months 57%

% left / fired after 6 months 25%% left / fired after 6 months 25% % left / fired after 14 months 34%% left / fired after 14 months 34%

“…“…companies will companies will need to reorient their need to reorient their

recruitment and recruitment and selection processes selection processes

by hiring “for fit” by hiring “for fit” rather than mere rather than mere

credentials…”credentials…”

““Contented Cows Give Better Milk”Contented Cows Give Better Milk”Bill Catlette & Richard HaddenBill Catlette & Richard Hadden

You get just two bites You get just two bites at at SuperiorSuperior performance performance

Place the right people the first time

Coach the people you’ve got

Have you ever hired or promoted

someone who did not live up to your

expectations?

Have you ever hired or promoted someone

who greatly exceeded your expectations?

How different were How different were the processes used in the processes used in

these two cases?these two cases?

“If only I had known that Joe…”

…predicting superior performance is all about having enough of the right information when you

make people decisions

Company Fit Attitudes,Values,

Demeanor,Appearance,

Integrity

?

Skill FitEducation, Training,

Experience,Skills, Etc.

“Checking the Past”

The Selection Process is...

& “Reviewing the Present”

“…to predict future ‘superior’ performance”

Here’s what you see & hire/promote…

Here’s what you get!



Here’s what you get!

No business can afford the risk!

Company Fit Attitudes,Values,

Demeanor,Appearance,

Integrity

…in predicting ‘superior’ performance

The missing third is...

Job MatchPersonality,

Abilities,Interests

Skill FitEducation, Training,

Experience,Skills, Etc.

Interviews have a 14% success rate in

identifying superior people!

– Hunter & Hunter “Validity & Utility of Alternative Predictors of Job Performance”. Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 96, No. 1. p90

Heads or Tails?Heads or Tails?

14%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Interview

The closer to 100% information the better…

What other information might be useful?

14%

26%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Interview + BackgroundCheck



“…(it) hinges on fit with the job…”

• Can deal with the mental demands of the position

• Are comfortable with the demands of the environment and people they must work with

• Enjoy the work and are motivated to do it

‘Superior’ producers fit their jobs and:

What happens if What happens if you don’t put the you don’t put the

right people in the right people in the right jobs?right jobs?

The Impact of Poor Job Fit

Source: Gallup

14%

26%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100




14%

26%

38%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


+ Personality & behavior


14%

26%

38%

54%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100



+ MentalAbilities


14%

26%

38%

54%

66%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100



+ MentalAbilities

+ Interests & Motivators


14%

26%

38%

54%

66%75%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100



+ MentalAbilities

+ Interests & Motivators

+ Job Matching


Economy & Finance

Magic Of Implementation Session 1