In the first case, I had a client that was trying to hire a sales person for their operation in Brazil and the manager knew that he wanted a very strong, very direct, independent assertive person for the job and low and behold, he found a candidate that really fit the bill.  This person had dominance as their highest trait and everything about them in the conversation, in their resume and their results showed that they are a very strong, very assertive person. And with that we know there is good and there is bad that can come along because the nature of that person although they can be very strong, can also be a bit challenging to work with on the inside.  They perceive other people that don’t see things their way as potentially being incompetent and they have a really difficult time dealing with anything that they see as interference or micromanagement.  So, we know that going in and so the manager and I had a very good conversation about the nature of this person and the manager said to me, “You know what Bob, I’d rather worry about taking a little bit of lead out of the person’s pencil than trying to put the lead in” and I said, “You know, I understand right where you’re coming from.”

Well right after that phone call, I had another conversation with the manager that was trying to hire somebody to work for them to run a program running alliances in Europe and this person was going to need to work with country managers all over Europe working with different partners and different areas of their business and in conversation with this manager, the manager said to me, “I am looking for somebody that’s very collaborative.  I need somebody who is a consensus oriented person who knows how to get things done while not making waves” and low and behold, he found himself a great candidate for that role.  This person’s dominance was by far their lowest trait and their patience was their highest trait, but when you take low dominance matched up with high patience, you definitely have a consensus oriented collaborative oriented person.

So we had a conversation and said all of that is great, but some times the person who may need to know how to break a little glass and you’re going to need to coach them on that and the manager said, “No problem, I am great at breaking glass.  I don’t have any problem in working with somebody that I am going to need to coach them to be more assertive than is their natural style.”  So it was a great lesson.  In both cases, mangers would go in to get what they think they were looking for, but they knew going in what the nature of their candidate was and they knew exactly what they were going to need to do to make this person more effective. And isn’t that what leadership is about? Understanding the strengths of the people that we have on our team, knowing how to position them to take advantage of what they do well, but also knowing where they may have difficulties and being able to anticipate that and coach them on that, so they can work through those areas that are not as natural for them.

Thanks for your time.