(an analogy that will make you rethink your current employee selection processes)
Australian managers rate about one quarter of their employees as high performers, about 50% as being adequate to very good and the final one quarter as being not-yet-competent (sub-standard).
Which beggars the question: WHY???
Why do business owners and managers accept such poor outcomes and, even worse, are content to keep using the same underperforming attraction and selection processes? All the while expecting a different and better result!
I would like to share an analogy with you that I hope will make all business leaders contemplate revisiting and improving their existing selection processes.
Let’s say that you operate a car rental business and let's pretend that instead of employees that generate productivity and revenue, it is solely your fleet of vehicles. In your fleet of vehicles you have four different types:
Toyota Corolla Honda Civic
- Outstanding Performance - Good Performance
- Highly reliable - Very reliable
- Highly efficient - Very efficient
- Very rarely breakdown - Rarely breakdown
- ROI = Outstanding - ROI = Good
Mazda 3 Rover Vitesse
- Adequate Performance - Poor Performance
- Reliable - Unreliable
- Efficient - Inefficient
- Occasional breakdowns - Continual breakdowns
- ROI = Adequate - ROI = Costing Money
If you were the CEO of this car rental company and you discovered that the purchasing department were still buying all four types of cars, surely you would be asking some serious questions. And what’s more, if you discovered that they were aware of the performance ratings and were still buying all four types you would probably sack the lot of them. But the reality is that because we are talking about “cars” and therefore there are no emotions involved, the purchasing department would have already made the decision to purchase more of the Toyota’s and Honda’s, some of the Mazda’s and none of the Rovers.
WHY – because it would be basic common sense to stop purchasing the poor performers and buy more of the high performers
Now let’s say that we are now talking about employees and we have four types:
High Performing Employees
- Outstanding Performance
- Highly reliable (always on time and give discretionary effort)
- Highly efficient (up to 3 x more productive than poor performers)
- Very rarely breakdown (very rarely take sickies, have to be really sick)
- ROI = Outstanding
Good Performing Employees
- Good Performance
- Very reliable (on time, sometimes discretionary effort)
- Very efficient (up to twice as productive as poor performers)
- Rarely breakdown (only take sickies when they are sick)
- ROI = Good
Adequate Performing Employees
- Adequate Performance
- Reliable (mostly on time)
- Efficient (earn their pay)
- Occasional breakdowns (sickies when sick plus a few when not)
- ROI = Pay their way
Poor Performing Employees
- Poor Performance
- Unreliable (disengaged)
- Inefficient (not competent at their job)
- Continual breakdowns (will manage to use all entitlements plus more)
- ROI = Costing the company money
If you were the CEO of this company and you discovered that the hiring managers and HR department were still employing all four types of employees, surely you would be asking some serious questions. And what’s more, if you discovered that they were aware of the performance ratings of these employees but had done nothing about the employee mix, you should sack the lot of them. But the reality is, this doesn’t happen. Management teams keep hiring poor performers and nothing ever changes.
WHY – because no one has asked the one simple question : “Is there a better way?”
And the answer to this very simple question is: “Yes, there is a better way and it is by adding the science of High Performance Role Benchmarks and JobFit assessments to the attraction and selection process”.
THE RESULT: A 300% increase in the success rate of hiring future high performers
So, if you would like to improve your fleet of employees, we will only be too happy to show you how to have a garage of Toyota’s and, most importantly, make sure you never buy a Rover ever again. For more information please email email@example.com