We have found again and again that if a placement doesn't work out, it's not because our talent lacked the necessary skills or experience. Instead, it's because their style and personality didn't click with the environment and/or the team at the client site.
In other, shorter words: It's all about fit.
Ironically, when we recently surveyed our clients, the vast majority said that "skills and experience" were the most important factors influencing their decision to hire somebody. This makes sense, in a way, since skills and experience are right there on the resume, while whether or not you're going have a productive working relationship with someone remains a matter of speculation: you just have to wait and see.
Of course, we believe that the miraculous pattern-recognition capabilities of an informed human brain can help make the speculative predictable. That is, if someone has a solid understanding of your business, your organization, and you, on the one hand, and the peculiarities and proclivities of talented professionals on the other, than that someone will be able to reliably assess when there is a "fit" between the latter and the former, and when not.
In any event, I wrote a song about "fit" being the new "it." Then I made a video, with liberal deployment of Brecht's Verfremdungseffekt.
Dude,
Are you licensed to be on a video with a Tupac hat?
peace bro..
fisher of men
It's part of my new Thug Marketing concept.
Actually, the same has been found in psychotherapy outcomes research... its not the modality or training or qualifications even of the therapist but rather the perceived 'fit' of the relationship between therapist and patient that is the best predictor of successful outcomes. Interesting post. Thanks.
Matt, it's great to see you combining your own mad skills...
Matt,
Are you saying that there is an emotional and a psychological connection that should be made with the client because “Verfremdungseffekt” says to “distance” oneself from the character (client) and become the observer?
I do indeed think that this emotional, psychological, even environmental, connection is key to a successful work relationship.
When I referred to the distancing effect, I meant that I used this effect in making the video in order to illustrate my point. By creating an image that was out of synch with the sound, where the image and the sound don't "fit" together, I was trying to show, in reverse, as it were, how important fit is.
Cute video, and something that's overlooked WAY too often. I'd like to see some serious exploration about this. As a freelance designer/artist/project manager, if I have 'issues' at a workplace, they'll say it's my skills and that can cost me, as well as potentially blacklisting me with an agency that could otherwise have generated a lot of business and goodwill for.
And as a studio manager, when I hire a someone, I have no way of specifying the kind of environment I like to run to the people I'm hiring the freelancer/employee from.
There's a lot of disscussion about "corporate environment" in other fields, and even though we talk about it amongst ourselves, it doesn't come up as often as it should.
I could probably write pages about it, but just as food for thought, here are the categories I use:
Rigid (sometimes called "corporate"): Proceedure is the buzzword in these places. Paperwork is very important, the clock is king, and the setup is designed to make the place function automatically. Publishing companies are often like this, where te work comes through on a regular schedule. When it works, there's less burden on any individual, but also less chance for anyone to shine. The biggest drawback to rigid environments is, obviously, inflexibility. A last minute client change or shifted deadline can turn such a place into a bearpit. Employees who work best in these situations are usually highly technically skilled, and enjoy the buzz of the "big machine," and it can be a really good environment for people getting started, since there's a lot of structure, but it can be opressive to someone who is comfortable working autonomously.
Casual: Less structured. These environments tend to be more goal oriented, like an ad ageny, where every project is different. The management in these places often expects to work in a 'hands off' manner, and rely on the skills of the employee. There's usually less guidance for the employee, which can make fitting into the workflow difficult at first. He's more free to work in his own way, but expected to be able to take on more responsibility. An employee in one of these places will have more demands on him, and very likely be expected to work unpredictable hours, but there's usually a greater chance to shine.
Toxic: Very important to mention. We've all had a few hell-jobs. Sometimes it's just a really bad fit, but sometimes a workplace is like a third-world prison. It may be one evil coworker or manager, it may be opression from upper management, but it needs to be identified, and the employee needs to get out as soon as possible. No matter how innocent an employee is, the kind of friction in these places can give someone a rotten reputation that will affect their future earnings capabilites, and their happiness in general. It would be nice if there weree a blog where people named names, so potential employees & placement agencies could be warned!
Anyway, hope that's useful info to you guys!