The Problem with Exceptional People
I’m a sucker for reading about the business side of design and am always fascinated to read Andy Rutledge’s perspective. His recent post, Designer, Owner, Manager - 1: Hiring the Right People addresses hiring strategy, something I happened to be re-reading in Michael Gerber’s The E-Myth Revisited. I’ve debated this issue on a number of occasions, sometimes with myself, sometimes with others, but never to a definitive conclusion.
Mediocre People, Exceptional System
The matter centers around two drastically different approaches to hiring strategy. Gerber argues that one of the most important keys to a successful business is building a system. Documentation, testing, planning and lots of lists and well defined processes are crucial to building a business system that can survive and thrive. The key then, is the system, not the people. Gerber argues that if the system is constructed appropriately the owner can basically “plug in” very average people and still produce exceptional results. Now, if you’re running a law firm or a medical practice, “average” will still mean someone who’s passed the bar or has a license to practice medicine, but either way the business should not seek to hire the crème de’ le’ crème or try to stock a design studio with a bunch of design rockstars. Basically, if the system is built the way Gerber thinks it should be, the system can produce exceptional results with minimal talent.
Gerber’s approach has never sat well with me as hiring mediocre people to produce exceptional results seems counter intuitive. On the other hand, Gerber has been counseling small business owners for 25 odd years, built an incredibly successful enterprise of his own and claims a success rate in his coaching services of three times the national average. Bottom line, he’s got to have a good idea or two at least. That or he’s completely hoodwinked a lot of people…
Hire Only Exceptional People
Andy Rutledge’s thoughts are much more in line with what I would naturally think when it comes to the people on which a business is built. Andy’s main point (and a point many others have made) is simple: Hire only exceptional people.
You cannot populate your staff with less-than-exceptional people and hope to succeed…Hire only those who are exceptional in some specific way.
It seems to make perfect sense: build your business with exceptional people and you’ll produce exceptional results. Pretty hard to argue with that logic if you ask me. Hiring people that are incredibly intelligent, disciplined, hard working, well rounded and motivated should naturally produce high-quality work. There’s one problem: How do you keep them around?
The Problem with Exceptional People
Much of the motivation behind Gerber’s point that you shouldn’t base a business around exceptional people is that keeping those people is difficult. If you have a staff comprised of exceptionally talented, intelligent, enthusiastic, disciplined, responsible and active employees, how do you get them to stick around? These people almost inevitably come with a hefty price tag, and even if you can afford to keep them around there’s no guarantee they will stay for long. People who embody all these traits are going to be prized anywhere they go and consequently pursued by other companies or inclined to start their own ventures. This is even more problematic for a very young company hiring its first or second employee. If you’re fortunate enough to hire an exceptionally talented, intelligent and productive individual as your first employee things will run beautifully…until that person leaves for another job. Losing an exceptional employee is tough and losing 50% of your workforce at the same time is even tougher. Either way it seems inevitable that these kind of employees won’t be around for years to come — they’re going to get snatched up or move on to bigger and better things.
Of course the flip side to this is that maybe if you build a company full of exceptional people, those exceptional people will want to work with each other and genuinely enjoy producing exceptional work. With a little bit of luck the work will be so exceptional that you can also pay all those exceptional salaries. Theoretically possible. Likely? Probably not, but given that the overwhelming majority of business ventures fail within a few years I suppose success isn’t likely no matter what approach you take.
Give Me Some Answers
Perhaps a lot of this is industry dependent. McDonald’s has built an empire using minimum wage labor, but does that work for everyone? Can a smaller professional organization along the lines of a design firm function using less than exceptional employees or do exceptional results require exceptional people?
Other’s Thoughts
I think it's a combination of both. McDonald's has a great system with "average" employees. The Yankee's have a lot of exceptional talent and the payroll to match but haven't won a World Serie's title in 9 years.
The best mix: Apple. Their products are a clear example of what happens when you mix exceptional people with an exceptional process.
by CP on 5/19/2009 at 11:24 a.m.I feel that it may be counterintuitive, but it ties in directly to Malcolm Gladwell's recent article about underdogs; properly coached to make a strength out of their nominal weaknesses, and by applying more effort than, say, natural or exceptionally talented people, they can not only succeed but even excel.
I think there is far too much emphasis on so-called "rockstar" design when that may be exactly what the client doesn't need. Competent design, that takes their needs (and their customers') into account is still entirely too rare on the web. It's like what's happened in architecture, where we have a handful of 'starchitects' that get all the press because of their strange glass and steel blobs that ordinary people find ridiculous; but the ones who do sensitive restoration work or extensions in an unfashionable older style, who design modest infill buildings, battle with small-minded town councils to get proper urban planning regulations, get nearly zero recognition (like, say, usability and standards advocates).
Devotion to craft is, I would argue, more important to a sustainable business than a stable of hotshots.
by AJ Kandy on 5/19/2009 at 11:25 a.m.If you're running a mundane business, and wish to continue down this path, you have no use for exceptional people.
If you're running an exceptional business (or want to), the exceptional people you hire won't be bolting at the first new opportunity. Be an exceptional manager that gets the most out of your exceptional employees, and make sure they are getting what they need out of their role in the company.
by Ryan Berg on 5/19/2009 at 11:58 a.m.@AJ,
I agree with you on the excessive emphasis on "rockstar designers" in the industry.
I don't think an exceptional employee is necessarily a rockstar, quite the contrary in fact. The "rockstar designer" idea seems to preclude being a team player, something that would seem absolutely necessary to being an exceptional employee.
by Matt Heisig on 5/19/2009 at 9:34 p.m.Well rockstar doesn't necessarily equal diva. I think an underdog who knows their limitations, and yet is constantly open to learning, asks good questions (of themselves and others) and strives to be better, is more valuable than someone who is a 9-to-5 clockwatcher. Then again, I think it's too easy to delve into strawman arguments about this kind of thing or, conversely, build up impossibly ideal concepts of Perfect Employees that we place on pedestals. The reality is that there is no ideal employee, only the best person for the task given the limits of geography, budget, and project scheduling. How many times have you had (or have been) the 'rockstar' designer in demand by too many clients at once? (it happens). It creates bad office politics. Better to work at making ALL your designers into rockstars, but that means you have to take the long view, and have a flexible idea about what 'rock' is (i.e. no rockism)
by AJ Kandy on 5/19/2009 at 9:56 p.m.