A Players & B Players
Why it matters that you know the difference between the two...
I had a fascinating conversation with my friend Kat Landa last week. Kat is SVP of Talent Solutions at DickersonBakker.
We were discussing some of the biggest hiring mistakes that leaders make.
One that I hadn’t considered, which she pointed out, is the idea of settling for a “B Player.â€
The reality is that you’re going to have some B players in your organization at some level. Just based on the math it’s unavoidable. But the key is to make sure that you stack your most critical roles and functions with true A players. People who consistently show up and perform above average. People you can count on to deliver in the most important situations.
When you are looking to fill a critical role, you can’t afford to hire average, unless you’re willing to accept average results. And that’s why you have to be able to distinguish between the two.
领英推è
But there’s another reason why you need to be able to distinguish between the two and make sure you focus on A players for key roles.
It was another one of those “surprise†statements from Kat.
What she said was, B players will only ever bring other B players to your organization. A players don’t follow B players. So you will never level-up your talent if you fill critical roles with B players. In fact, B players will permeate your organization with other B-level talent. But if you hire A players into key roles, they will attract other A-level talent to the organization, and eventually your entire organization will be a talent farm for A players.
In my mind, this is the most important reason you should focus on hiring A players into key roles.
Top performers are talent magnets.
If you want your organization to be magnetic to great talent, the first thing you need to do is start hiring great talent. They will create the magnetism you’re looking for, and will bring other great talent to your doorstep.
But great talent won’t show up if you have average performers in all of your key roles.
Numbers, as you said, make ‘B’ players inevitable. Some of it due to nature. But, IMVHO, a lot has to do with nurture. I got some great advice when I was a newbie youth soccer coach. The ‘A’ kids will perform. So, develop those ‘B’ kids to the best they can/will be so that 1) personal growth and success motivates them to achieve higher, and 2) the ‘A’ players trust and utilize them further building their confidence and the strength of the overall team. It’s all between the ears and in their hearts.
Coaching CEOs to Thrive | GALLUP-Certified Strengths Coach | Not a fan of SPAM
9 个月Andrew Olsen, I so agree. Thank you for sharing this insight from Kat. Have you read #NoRulesRules from Reed Hastings and Erin Meyer? They used the term Talent Density. What they found that the lower their talent density was, the lower their A players actually performed. So, increasing the ratio of A players to B players actually increased the quality of each individual A player. I highly recommend that book.
CEO at Rootstock Philanthropy & Founder, Philanthropy Network | Working towards a better world
9 个月This is an outstanding post - and absolutely true. I’ve watched (with deep personal dismay) many organizations settle for B (or lower) level talent in mission critical roles, including Director and C-Level roles. And what happened to those organizations over time? Exactly what you said: The entire organization leveled down, sometimes to existentially perilous levels. But something else happened too: the A-players left because they won’t tolerate playing with the JV. Worse, the A-players end up with no mentorship, are underappreciated, end up being resented by the B-players (who can’t keep up) - or worse. When it comes to talent, don’t settle. Ever.