Feature

posted 1 Nov 2002 in Volume 5 Issue 6

Nurture your juniors: recruiting and retaining top-level people

The interview and selection process is only the beginning of a long road to effectively recruiting and retaining high-quality people. Many firms are keen to boast the long-working records of employees who started with the firm many years previously. However, the process of recruiting the right people and then developing their careers from junior to, hopefully, senior level is a delicate process requiring time and dedication from management. David H. Maister, a management consultant at Maister Associates and Patrick J. McKenna, a partner at Edge International, describe the strategies firms should employ to make the most of an invaluable asset, their people.

Junior professionals, by definition, are at the early stages of a career, and need one thing above all: the chance to develop and build their skills. Without this, their career (and their livelihood) is at risk. How well skills are built depends upon two key processes. The first is the work-assignment system that decides what projects they get to work on (and for what part of the project they are given responsibility). The second is the quality of supervision that they receive while working on these assigned projects. While firms must ensure that these two processes are working properly, there can be a wide variation in how formal these processes are.

The work assignment system

In some firms, each senior person has the freedom to staff his or her own job from a general pool of junior professionals, while in others, junior professionals tend to work for the same senior people all of the time, becoming either officially or unofficially ‘their’ juniors.

A better model, in our view, is one where all the senior people get together regularly and jointly allocate junior staff to projects, thereby sharing the responsibility to act like a group. They can consider together the trade-offs between keeping people busy, providing the best resources to key clients, providing developmental work experience, achieving efficiency, and keeping motivation and morale high.

Even where there is no formal authoritative role for the group leader in work scheduling, there is an important informal role of monitoring the pattern of work assignments that juniors are getting. By knowing what is going on, the group leader can have an influence by dropping in on senior colleagues from time to time and saying things like:

“I see you’re using Jimmy for the sixth time on this kind of transaction, which makes a lot of economic sense since he’s so much more up to speed. However, I know Jimmy’s keen to learn some new things, and I wondered if, next time you have a transaction like this, you might consider using Mary instead.

“I know she’s dying to work with you and would be really committed, since she would be exposed to new things. She would be eager to look good in your eyes. If you’d be willing to agree, you’d be contributing a lot to the group, since we’d reduce the risk that both Jimmy and Mary might quit to get the work opportunities they’re after. Would you be willing to help me out on this?”

Done with enough style and grace, the group leader can have a significant impact on the pattern of work assignments, and hence on motivation, morale and retention.

The work supervision system

Ensuring excellence in work supervision can be a harder topic for the group leader, since many groups do not have a prior agreement on what constitutes appropriate standards of supervising work. In many firms, this is an area left for each senior person’s autonomy, with project leaders free to manage in the style they prefer.

We believe that the quality of work supervision is so critical that it deserves special attention. In Maister’s book Practice What You Preach, (Free Press, 2001), it was shown, in a global statistical study, to be one of the prime determinants of financial success.

As always, we think that it is wise to engage your senior colleagues in establishing standards, rather than trying to impose standards upon them. You should ask what standards of work supervision they think they ought to be accountable for. Note that we do not suggest that you establish standards you will try for, because agreeing to try leaves a lot of loopholes: “I didn’t agree to do this, I agreed to try, but I got busy. Sorry.”

Here are some standards we would propose. We think it reasonable that the junior people on a transaction are entitled to certain expectations:

1. When tasks and projects are assigned to them, they understand thoroughly what is expected of them;

2. They understand how their assigned tasks fit into the overall objectives for the engagement;

3. Help is available when they need to have

questions answered;

4. They receive prompt feedback, good or bad;

5. When they are corrected for something they did or failed to do, it is done in a constructive way;

6. They receive good coaching to help improve their performance;

7. They are kept informed about the things they need to know to do their job properly;

8. They have the freedom to make the necessary decisions to do their work effectively;

9. They are actively encouraged to volunteer new ideas and make suggestions for improvement;

10. Team meetings are conducted in a way that builds trust and mutual respect;

11. In each engagement very high standards for performance are set and enforced;

12. They feel like a member of a well-functioning team;

13. Their work makes good use of their knowledge

and ability;

14. Their projects help them learn and grow;

15. Their work is interesting and challenging.

If you have difficulty getting your senior colleagues to accept these accountabilities, ask them to cast their minds back to when they were junior people. Ask them how they wished to be treated when they were juniors, (not how they were treated, but how they wish they had been treated).

You will probably end your discussion with a different list, (and maybe a shorter one), than ours, but that’s OK. What you will have accomplished is raising your people’s sensitivity and awareness to the fact that there are some standards of behaviour in work supervision that must be considered and enforced.

After this discussion the group leader should monitor performance in this area, formally or informally. The formal approach might involve a questionnaire completed by all the staff on each project, rating their work experience, with the forms going back to the practice leader. According to Karl Kristoff, of US law firm Hodgson Russ:

“There is a significant desire among our younger professionals for the kind of structure and leadership that creates feedback programmes. Sometimes even some of my more sceptical partners have been pleasantly surprised during meetings that have been preceded by anonymous questionnaires and other devices designed to bring out the views of our young people in a non-threatening way. Associates (junior professionals) want to be part of an organisation that is interested in their training.”

However, such formality might not be needed if the group leader is prepared to walk the halls, hang out in the coffee room or chat by the water-cooler. It is usually not difficult for an activist group leader to find out which senior colleagues are doing this well, and which are not. The key is the group leader’s willingness to act on the information. For example, he or she could drop by a senior colleague’s office, close the door and say something like:

“Richard, this is just between us, but I wanted to pass on some things I’m hearing. I’ve been talking to our juniors and, to put it bluntly, you’re not their favourite person to work for. They say they don’t get enough guidance from you as to what you want them to do and you don’t give a lot of feedback.

“I’ve no idea if this is true, but it might get to the point where our best juniors avoid your projects. This would be tragic, because you’ve got a lot to offer and your clients deserve to be served by the best we’ve got. Can you tell me what’s going on from your perspective? Is there anything at all I can do to help?”

Naturally, this approach won’t work every time. But if the group leader is diligent in having such conversations every time they are needed, people will eventually get the message that the standards are real. The group leader does not need to act like a bully, or a cop, but it can be remarkably effective to be the conscience of the group, continually reminding people of the standards you (collectively) set for yourselves.

When Nick Jarrett-Kerr was with Bevan Ashford, he said of his firm: “Inculcate the right values in the partnership in terms of how they practice in the team context. Every one of our partners does some supervising, it’s part of what being a partner means at this firm.”

Mentors

It is a good idea to establish a system whereby everyone in your group has a mentor. You will play the mentoring role to your senior colleagues but, in turn, each of them must be a mentor to at least one, and probably a few, junior professionals. The mentor role is not to be an advocate for those they are mentoring, but to be a sounding board, to provide career guidance, and to be someone to turn to when there are difficulties.

One of the most respected and admired group heads at Credit Suisse First Boston is Bayo Ogunlesi, who leads the energy and power group in their investment banking division. Eileen Urban, chief operating officer in the group, tells this story:

“Ogunlesi established a system of assignments for mentors that pairs (senior) managing directors with (more junior) vice presidents who are outside their reporting line. The mentors are expected to develop a relationship of trust and great communication. One of Ogunlesi’s unusual rules is that the mentor is fined (actual cash out of his or her own pocket) if the mentee resigns and he was not forewarned. The issue isn’t the resignation itself but the lack of communication. If the communication is not enough for the mentor to understand and help the person act on issues that are troubling to them, then they must not be doing the role as they are expected to.

“The system has been a great success. The mentoring has turned into a way of differentiating our group, and even some of our ‘unbelievers’ have turned into stars at it. We believe that everybody has the ability to mentor someone; the secret is in the match.”

The virtues of a good mentoring system, (which combines two rules: everybody must be a mentor and everybody must have a designated mentor), are many. Naturally, your junior staff will benefit, because they will have someone to turn to. Second, your time will be freed up. A formal mentoring system will mean that you will not have to do all the coaching yourself. Third, the practice your colleagues will get in being a mentor will help them develop interpersonal, social and emotional skills that will help them in their professional work.

Last, but not least, a mentoring programme will help you identify those who are particularly skilled and help you groom either your successor or new subgroup leaders that will be needed when your group gets too large to manage. Francine Popoli Edelman, President of I2i Communications (a public relations firm) told us:

“A former mentor of mine was a brilliant, caring person with high professional standards and impeccable integrity. While he treated employees with fairness and generosity he failed to inspire loyalty. There was no communication and therefore no emotional connection. So when an employee got a better or different offer they had no reservations about leaving the company. I spend at least 20 minutes or more each day talking to my staff; not just about business, but about them; how they are doing, how their kids are, what their plans are for the weekend. They know me, my family, even my dog. But more importantly, I know them: their interests, hopes, aspirations and expectations.

“The results are clearly instructive. We continue to have one of the lowest attrition rates in our industry. In my judgement, that makes for a more stable, cohesive and collaborative work environment.”

Embedded within Edelman’s story is the lesson that mentoring is not just a job for the group leader. With appropriate role modelling, the group leader can raise the level of mentoring throughout the group – with obvious benefits.

Hiring

Since professional firms have nothing to sell but their people, it is wise for group leaders to be significantly involved in all new hires (senior or junior) to the group. This doesn’t mean that the group leader has to do it alone, just that he or she plays a significant role.

The most important recruitment lesson to remember is that you should hire for attitude and train for skills. Skills you can build. Attitude and character are harder to change. You need to have a sense of who is and who is not your firm’s kind of person, and hire to fit the culture. You should look for people with enthusiasm, excitement, sparks, energy, spirit, a sharing style, personality and compatibility. Try to hire people who have all this innate in their personality.

It is wise to involve your whole team in hiring, including both junior and senior people. They are the ones who will have to work most closely with the new person and their judgement is crucial. Never hire just to fill a capacity need: remember always that you are entering into a multi-year relationship with this person. Ask: “Do I really want to live with this person, day in and day out?”

The problem of hiring people for professional careers is that there is an overwhelming tendency to focus on qualifications, grades, and technical accomplishments. Yet, as we have argued repeatedly, professional life is not about technical matters alone; whether one is talking about dealing with clients, colleagues, superiors or subordinates, success in professional life is also about (perhaps, ultimately, even more about) the ability to deal with other human beings.

How do you identify attitudes and personality characteristics in the hiring process? Interviews help, of course, particularly if you pay attention to the non-work related things that people have done with their lives. There used to be a maxim that organising a scout troop when you were young to help old people cross the road would count more toward getting admitted to Harvard Business School than a few extra points in your school record. This may not be literally accurate, but it reflects a great truth that those who have already shown initiative, drive and organising ability in their personal lives will probably show it in their work lives.

On similar grounds, it is worth paying attention to the previous jobs someone has held. Has this person ever had to deal directly with any form of client or customer? Have they ever held a job that required them to deal with the public? The specifics don’t matter, but the experience and practice such jobs give in developing interpersonal, social and emotional skills can be invaluable. Past experience (no matter how brief, nor how long ago) in some form of retail sales, we have observed, is an immensely useful background.

It is possible to go beyond interviews to screen for attitudes and personality. Two firms in our experience were creative about their interviewing process. The first, a law firm, asked all candidates at their final interview to say which had been their favourite course in law school. They then called in a secretary and (with a half-hour to think about it) asked the candidate to explain the content of the course to the secretary. The secretary, in essence, had the final say on whether the person was hired. It was not enough, this firm believed, to know your stuff. Before you were hired, you had to demonstrate the ability to explain it to an intelligent layperson.

The second firm, of accountants, brought all their final candidates together and put them in a room with a two-way mirror. The candidates were told they would be observed, and were asked to do a joint exercise (equivalent to building a house out of playing cards). The resulting behaviour was fascinating to watch. Thinking that they were supposed to be demonstrating leadership, many candidates competed to ‘take charge’ of their group. In fact, the accounting firm was looking for people who felt comfortable being part of a team without the ego need to be its leader. They made offers only to those who did not try to dominate.

If your purpose in recruiting is to try and discover the truth about each candidate’s character, the equivalent is also true in reverse. Candidates want to know what it really is like to work for your group. It is foolhardy in the interview process to misrepresent in any way what your group has to offer in terms of work environment, client challenges, degree of collaboration and teamwork. If someone joins you because they bought into a ‘pitch’ that turns out to be false, or even slightly exaggerated, they will discover the deception in the first week.

Recruiting interviews are about trying to uncover a true compatibility, so that both sides can work together with energy and passion. Tell the truth, warts and all. r

David Maister is a management consultant at Maister Associates. He can be contacted at: david_maister@msn.com. Patrick McKenna is a partner at Edge International. He can be contacted at: patrick.mckenna@attglobal.net. Article excerpted from: First Among Equals: How to Manage a Group of Professionals, Free Press,2002. (www.firstamongequals.com)