HELP – I CREATED A MONSTER! (I wish I hadn’t made that recommendation.)
One recurring question my clients ask is what to do after they helped someone get the job and they wish that they hadn’t.
We’ve all been there: We recommended or hired someone not because we thought they would do wonderfully in the job, but because we thought they could grow into it, and we miscalculated. We knew they would make mistakes, and we promised to be there to help them develop. We had no idea the monster we were creating would attack the village. So, now what?
First, to be fair, check your own motives. Did you think that this person would do everything you told them to do 100%? Were they supposed to be a puppet? Are you resorting to saying things like, “I made you, and I can break you,” “you owe me everything you have now,” “I got you this position, and I can take it away,” or even thinking them? If so, you didn’t respect this person, you thought they were manipulatable. You may have even sought to rule through them without risking your own name and reputation. Did you consider yourself a “king maker” and did being considered one go to your head?
Put yourself in the shoes of the person you recommended or talked into taking the position based on the support that you offered them. Would you have accepted such a position if it meant that your name and reputation were on the line, but making your own decisions would unfairly be deemed treasonous? (I discuss standing up for oneself against such treatment in another piece.)
On the other hand, if you find that you have dragged a mule across the finish line just to hear it bray all day about how it is now convinced that it is a racehorse, you may have created a monster. I have only been there a few times over the last thirty years, but it is always tough lesson.
A few years ago, a high-profile decision-making position was expiring, and the incumbent had specifically requested support for his chosen replacement. I met with this person and found myself unimpressed. They seemed great on paper but lacked any depth of knowledge and failed to answer the questions I asked. Instead of providing even adequate answers, they simply repeated how they were “just, you know, really passionate” about the issues.?I circled back to report my findings. The incumbent requested that I support this person anyway, as a favor based on the potential he saw. And so I did, against my better judgement. I offered my support under the auspice that we were giving this person a chance to learn and grow. I was investing in a potential future leader. I stood up for them when others questioned their qualifications. They obviously wanted to be involved, and they seemed to be interested in learning. We couldn’t have been more wrong.
The person we recommended didn’t have experience in the arena that we gave them a free pass to ascend within, and they were not interested in learning the ropes. Once they had the job, they pronounced that they had deserved to shoot to the top of the decision-making ladder based on their own superior intellect and self-perceived, yet undeveloped, leadership attributes.
Instead of simply making a few decisions which we would not have made and did not support, or bumbling their way through established processes, they demonstrated a complete disregard for process or input. When a few people unfairly made arguments that were personal, they decided all complaints against their performance were thus, and became self-righteously indignant. When previous supporters rightfully questioned formal actions that they had taken, they bristled and claimed they were being picked on. This demonstrated immaturity surprised us.
Unable to explain the specifics and reasoning behind their actions, they proclaimed themselves a martyr and hid behind accusations that any complaint was based in self-interest. They used language like, “I am not beholden or bought and paid for,” where it was obviously inapplicable. The few “white knights” who took the bait of these false proclamations provided welcome cover from the accountability this person was avoiding. The new appointee demonstrated behavior that indicated that they thought they had originally been recommended for the position by a great many people who had been utterly impressed by them and their supposed merits. The arrogance they now displayed was astounding, and we had to admit that we had contributed it.
Those of us who supported this person without any expectation of ownership or indebtedness still suffered a loss. We had called in our own bargaining chips to get them into this position. We had made a bad investment. The result could be that we become less likely to take future chances on someone with real potential. We have been burned, and we have learned. So, what can we do; what can you do?
Once you have clearly and respectfully outlined what you see as the problem and solution, step back and wait.
Criticism stings, for some more than others. For some it can challenge their identity. For those living in a fantasy of their own making, popping that bubble can be devastating. Give time for them to digest the information outside their initial emotional reaction and remain available for more discussion.
Have they demonstrated a willingness to learn from their mistakes? Even if they hold their ground on the decision they made, and even if time proves they were right, there may be a lesson in how they reacted. Are they willing to address how they handled the situation? If so, reiterate your support. This is part of the development process to which you originally committed. If not, you may have to cut your losses and detach. In our case, the appointee has declared higher aspirations, and has treated their original supporters as mere steppingstones. We share too much experience to offer any future support based on the performance we have seen so far.
Have the mistakes this person made crossed such legal or ethical bounds which clearly dictate their immediate removal? If so, such action is appropriate. If not, avoid overreacting or calling for their resignation. Doing so only fuels their victimhood myth and impedes progress. If the position carries a natural opportunity for turnover, recruit a new candidate, and support their replacement.
Take this opportunity to weigh the balance on your human investments and keep investing in others professionally. If your tally shows more mistakes than successes, you may be offering your support too quickly. You may be prone to “pedestal syndrome,” or ruled by first impressions. You may need to learn to take more time to discern the worthiness of those you are recommending, or your own motives. Conversely, if mistakes represent less than 1% of your human portfolio, you are probably a genuine leader who needs only to refine your radar based on your latest experience.
If you are reading this article because you are the one that was recommended and now face criticism, weigh the comments of your previous supporters in the same way. The long term professional relationship may be recoverable if you remain open to thoughtful explanations, or better yet, initiate them.
Jennifer Yuhas?is the President/CEO of Cardinal Point Strategic Resources LLC, providing Executive Coaching, Negotiations, Training, Planning, Facilitation, Mediation, and Collaborative Processes - Helping You Navigate Your Professional Path.?She possesses an extensive background in Executive Coaching, Negotiations, Legislative, Liaison work, Team Building, and group processes. She has led several teams since 1995 and served as the Negotiations Strategy Lead for the Alaska Delegation to the Pacific Salmon Treaty, and the Joint Pacific Alaska Range Complex (JPARC) Airspace?Planning Negotiations Lead for the Alaska Department of Fish & Game.?To secure services, contact: [email protected]