China's Communist Party has a woman problem. At the end of the Chinese Communist Party's 19th Congress, the new Politburo Standing Committee was revealed: seven middle aged men in dark suits, without a woman to be seen.
Here's a little secret: women make terrific co-workers, just like guys but different from guys. Oh, another thing: never ever feel castrated when a woman rather than a man does better. The women in my team are every bit as motivated, if not more, when it came to achieving great results.
The task of a leader is to assemble the best team possible. How many leaders can say with absolute certainty that their hiring decisions are based solely on job-relevant criteria?
Perhaps the most malignant obstacle to recruiting great team members is what psychologists call halo effect. Studies show that a single positive characteristic - like a winning smile can distort our view of people's abilities. Good looking people are perceived as more intelligent, competent and qualified than their less attractive colleagues despite not being objectively better at any of these things. In a 2013 study, when images were photoshopped, a 6' 4" man was rated to have more leadership ability by participants than a 5' 4" version of the same person.
But wait. It gets worse.
Research about interview bias suggests that we can't help but favor those who remind us of ourselves.
While similarity among team members can foster smoother interactions and better working relationships, too much similarity can actually stifle certain elements of performance. If we surround ourselves with people exactly like ourselves, without diversity of opinion, we run the risk of ideas grinding to a halt.
There is no formula for guaranteed success in hiring. My personal way to minimize my interviewing blind spot is to include multiple interviewers. I leverage my best team members to co-interview with me. This method has been relatively reliable to help me reach better hiring decisions. But it is not foolproof. I have encountered a well-prepared candidate who aced her interview and everyone liked her just fine. But one month after hiring her, we can't help noticing that she is not a good fit.
No matter how we lead, how often we recognize, or how generously we reward, there's no substitute for selecting talented people and placing them in the right roles. It's a matter of opening our eyes.
Here's a little secret: women make terrific co-workers, just like guys but different from guys. Oh, another thing: never ever feel castrated when a woman rather than a man does better. The women in my team are every bit as motivated, if not more, when it came to achieving great results.
The task of a leader is to assemble the best team possible. How many leaders can say with absolute certainty that their hiring decisions are based solely on job-relevant criteria?
Perhaps the most malignant obstacle to recruiting great team members is what psychologists call halo effect. Studies show that a single positive characteristic - like a winning smile can distort our view of people's abilities. Good looking people are perceived as more intelligent, competent and qualified than their less attractive colleagues despite not being objectively better at any of these things. In a 2013 study, when images were photoshopped, a 6' 4" man was rated to have more leadership ability by participants than a 5' 4" version of the same person.
But wait. It gets worse.
Research about interview bias suggests that we can't help but favor those who remind us of ourselves.
While similarity among team members can foster smoother interactions and better working relationships, too much similarity can actually stifle certain elements of performance. If we surround ourselves with people exactly like ourselves, without diversity of opinion, we run the risk of ideas grinding to a halt.
There is no formula for guaranteed success in hiring. My personal way to minimize my interviewing blind spot is to include multiple interviewers. I leverage my best team members to co-interview with me. This method has been relatively reliable to help me reach better hiring decisions. But it is not foolproof. I have encountered a well-prepared candidate who aced her interview and everyone liked her just fine. But one month after hiring her, we can't help noticing that she is not a good fit.
No matter how we lead, how often we recognize, or how generously we reward, there's no substitute for selecting talented people and placing them in the right roles. It's a matter of opening our eyes.