Biblical Business Radical: Qualifying New Employees

An article recently on a business ministry network described how David wasn't qualified to fight Goliath. He had his passion for honoring God's Name and His people. But the interview process went sort of like this: "What are your qualifications to fight this giant? You're just a youth." "I am but a shepherd, not a warrior. I haven't killed a giant but I've killed a lion and a bear." It's like saying, "I've never run a C corp before, but I successfully managed a lemonade stand." (I'm sure it takes some cunning and skill with primitive weapons to defeat animals that are stronger and faster than you are.)

It got me thinking about unqualified other candidates: Moses, who managed sheep for 40 years; Judas, who handled the money for Christ's disciples instead of the more qualified Matthew; even the disciples who were far less qualified than any rabbinical students at the time. These are examples where the lesser qualified still excelled in their "jobs".

I'm not trying to prove a rule through the exceptions. We do that all the time in business literature. "If you only do X like these three successful companies, you too will succeed." We don't see the 1000 other companies also doing X that failed within 5 years. (In this example we have a 0.030 success rate, a batting average that wouldn't qualify you for a high school junior varsity team.) Scripture also has examples of experts being appointed to their proper role in order to ensure success: the spiritually gifted craftsmen for the tabernacle and later for the temple, the wall builders/masons supervising the unskilled families when rebuilding the city of Jerusalem in the book of Nehemiah.

No matter how our hiring process goes, chances are 95% that the candidates' range of aptitudes is going to be between 2.5 and 7.5 on a 10-point scale. The totally inept should not be applying and the stellar candidates won't apply because they're succeeding where they're currently at. On a bell curve, you have 2/3rds chance of hiring an average person and a 1/6th chance of hiring an above-average person.

In several conversations this week with a variety of business owners, the hiring process can't radically change this curve. In fact, one admitted that successful traits, like organization, initiative, and proactivity cannot be screened. Most of our hiring processes screen for good interviewees and personality/behavioral assessment takers. In fact, 90% of our hiring appraisal is, like performance appraisals, based more on our own preferences, perspectives and policies than the person we're trying to hire.

Thus, the key is how you work with after you hire them. How much do you coach them to help them make progress? How well are you integrating them into the team? How well do they align with the efforts, values and goals of the rest of the organization?