No More Job Description! Now What?

Spanish version

Farewell to a tool that speaks but does not listen!

I would like to publicly confess the feeling of discomfort that I have felt over and over again when utilizing job descriptions for executive searches, in my many years as an HR consultant. At the very least, I have found this tool insufficient yet, must admit, that no timely counter offer has been made on my part. Granted that I have lacked the courage to go against the drift and make the necessary indictment of this tool with the same strength and clarity with which contradictions unfolded before me.

The dysfunctional characteristic of job descriptions becomes even more evident once the professional is already in the company and gaps begin to emerge between the job description′s bullets and the real time dilemmas that the executive must sort through. 

Added to this, are the complications resulting from companies′ schizophrenia, where walking the talk is not a common practice.

There is a job description for each and every position; yet only 40% of the listed tasks are essential in order to carry out the described role. The remaining 60% are secondary and of mere impact if executed.

Could we at this point agree that this model is an approximation that lacks a great deal of fine-tuning?

If treating customers with a personalized approach is the underlying organizational premise then why not do the same with our staff members? Especially, if talented people are an organization′s greatest assets!

"Those executives who simply meet job description requirements are not outstanding, they are only doing what they get paid to do"… I′ve heard clients say when describing the professional that they are looking to replace or wish never to meet.

The job description is a unidirectional tool, a mere checklist.  It is thought out for the MUST DO in relation to a previously established outcome, leaving no room for the WANT TO DO.  Job descriptions do not seek PURPOSE, although it is fully proven that love for the job is a generator and an accelerator of RESULTS.

Knowing what ¨must be done¨ doesn′t necessarily lead to results.

Frequently, we hear that the origin of executive replacement comes from discrepancies in the way of doing… "it′s a matter of bad judgment, not of lack of knowledge".

Job descriptions come off as incomplete when it comes to recruiting, as well as dissonant when accompanying dialogue and co-construction - both of which, are required by intrapreneurial and talented profiles that wish to go the extra mile.

It is as anachronistic as it is unrealistic to set an orderly list of responsibilities, weighing percentages of dedication and priorities. But even worse, is to allow its continuity through the traditional Performance Review process whose objective is to measure and reward based on such a ¨list¨. In other words, we cannot abandon job descriptions without doing the same with Performance Reviews. Both share the same irreparable destiny, requiring a revision in order to be coherently articulated.

Talking about this 10 years ago would have been CHAOS, itself!

The world keeps evolving at an exponential rate! Situations emerge that necessarily draw us away from the daily checklists. And what about those days when we choose to escape monotony by volunteering for special projects or tangential duties? 

Together with the arrival of the digital code revolution, came bidirectional communication, permanent dialogue and freedom of speech. I often find executives that spontaneously - yet almost clandestinely - develop ¨alternative methods¨ of feedback and feedforwarding. While not official, these serve as a means of making things go in the direction we want them to and operate in parallel to the traditional system.

Now is the time to create new tools that generate dialogue, that include both the company′s commitment as well as those undertakings that its people wish to commit to. 

After all, isn′t it the latter that should be taken into account when adding a professional to a team?

Today, a company′s wishes and expectations have to do with owning teams whose desire is to give their best and commit to going the extra mile.

A CEB survey conducted in the US amongst 13,000 employees worldwide, shows that 66% of staff members say that the Performance Review process interferes with their productivity and that it is not relevant to the job they perform.

The importance of systemic thinking is of no exception in this case...

• How do we contribute to an "Organizational Habitat", in which talent does not become hostage of internal fairness nor is limited by the job description itself?
• Are organizational charts a coherent representation of how we operate in collaborative teams within an organization? Or are they just another functional tool to job descriptions, forcing us to stay inside the box?
• Can HR analytics equate to agility, if we are anchored in standardized designs?

So how do we go about it?

To begin with, we should find the courage to say goodbye to archaic models such as Performance Reviews, traditional recruiting, and organizational charts to dive into the challenge of recreating and co-creating suitable HR formats for each industry. It is important to differentiate the needs of each sector; be it industrial, service, pharmaceutical, or any other. The era of ¨one-size- fits- all¨ has come to an end.

Welcome to the era of Job Design and Mutual Choice!

Job Design is built on three fundamental pillars.

1.    The executive′s freedom to state his or her purpose and commit to a specific contribution resulting in a win-win relationship.

2.    Roles are shaped according to individual skills for job enrichment, and in return, employees may unleash their potential as they take “ownership of their work”.

3.    The design of a suitable ¨Organizational Habitat¨ that breaks away from task standardization, allowing the ¨intrapreneural gene¨ to come to light.

Job Design helps to co-create job positions along with the leader in order to broaden the fields of action and define them in detail, focusing on effectiveness, shared purpose and Employee Value Proposition (EVP), while fostering a culture that leads to Employee Engagement.

Job Design is a tool that allows leaders to get to know their teams, including its members′ intrinsic motivations. 

Furthermore, it exposes the limitations of action that each professional may have in a company. This way, disenchantment can be avoided if at any point the executive feels curtailed or surprised by the boundaries of his or her room for freedom.

This mutual knowledge is fundamental in order to genuinely respond to expectations of both parties and ensure a win-win relationship beneficial to all.

Probably the only, yet not minor, challenge ahead of us is to learn to have dialogue - honoring the ability that constitutes us as human beings – without shielding ourselves from or restricting ourselves with the standardized bullets of tasks to accomplish. This, too, is working to attract talent!

The time has come! We must dare to put disruptive HR management practices in place that seek to better represent how things truly work in the reality we live in.

I am 100% positive that if self-realization finds its way into Job Design, we will be making a huge difference.

Where will we see the results? 

In people′s well-being as well as in our companies′ bottom lines.

"My biggest Challenge is to identify and show “what to do” to bring the Future to the Present at Work"

Susana von der Heide - President & Thinking Partner - VON DER HEIDE