Random thoughts on hiring, decision making

Must be 18 to enter! Talk about anything but Football

Moderator: Team Captains

Post Reply
User avatar
Toppy Vann
Hall of Famer
Posts: 9789
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2005 12:56 pm

This might be an interesting place to discuss this topic as some of us have had some or a lot of hiring experience and certainly who gets hired and selected in pro sports is critical to success.

SP mentions Gary Latham - and here are a wealth of his papers. He gave a lecture years ago and I recall telling SFU's Dean of Business in the late 70s IIRC hire this guy but they were luke warm on him yet he was practical and theoretical. That Dean wanted more theory I guess or feared his great ability to communicate. Dunno.
WCJ posted about the book "How we decide" and here is a summary:
Summary of How We Decide by Jonah Lehrer (Summarised by Paul Arnold – Trainer & Facilitator – paul_arnold@me.com)

http://slooowdown.wordpress.com/2012/02 ... oldme-com/
I use material from Michael Shermer in talks I do and he has brilliant examples of where perception is not always reality and is not immaculate.
This Canadian company - Self Management Group (I use their low cost, high quality surveys) has also worked with NHL teams to select future good draft picks. Their psychometric tests are good predictors of success in some jobs and industries. You don't use this or any tool as the sole device for selection! These tests are normative meaning that results are scored against others in the data base who are proven in the field. These are good for job selection but I know dozens of HR folks using ipsative tests that are great at assessing social styles or super for team building and making hiring decisions off these.
I have worked with great executives who hire bad people. I have seen bad execs hire good people. My point - hiring good talent is not correlated with good job performance of the person making the hiring decision. But what I do find is critical is the hiring person's mind set about hiring.

If they believe in "gut" decision making (despite that stuff coming from the gut kind of stinks) they tend to be hit and miss or hire very badly. I knew one exec. who thrice has hired the person who got him on probation once and fired twice! Three freaking times! He believes he knows best and makes gut decisions and is blind to the past.

The best predictor for selection are Assessment Centers but the costs preclude many from using this.
"Ability without character will lose." - Marv Levy
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

http://slooowdown.wordpress.com/2012/02 ... oldme-com/

Toppy, that website provides a great discussion of the book "How We Decide." The book is high on the list of thought changing influences in my life.

Rational thinking. And thinking that comes from intuition, that can be accessed in a milli-second, in an emergency, without conscious thought, and represents the totality of your experience (gut feeling when well applied). We tend to underrate intuition. After reading that book, I have great respect for it.

Yogi Berra was asked what he thought about while hitting. "You can't think and hit at the same time." LOL I truly believe some athletes interfere with their athletic instincts by thinking too much. They need to get deeper, to a more instinctive level. Automatic.

Re hiring a football coach ...

When someone works for you, you have all you need to know about their qualifications. And of course familiarity can make for a comfortable, and less than excellent, choice. Many proteges reflect their mentor, for better or worse, and do not make great hires. Sound familiar? Without naming names?

And of course, a truly outstanding assistant, as with Bill Walsh designing offences for Paul Brown, can be denied the top job, for a number of reasons. A threat to one's own sense of self. Jealousy? Whatever ...

Humans move in fits and starts, with lots of mistakes. That is another lesson from that book. Do not deny your mistakes. Learn from them.

With football, it seems to me that the game is so visible, the way a team plays. The coach is visible on the sidelines. The decisions are visible. The leadership is visible. The way the team plays reflects on the coach. I recall a friend saying that he could see exactly what I was doing with my team. Another noted hard my team worked. I took those compliments to heart, as lifetime rewards. Or in basketball, a respected colleague saying: "They (the opponent) couldn't handle your press." Along with my flaws as a coach, what do those things say about me as a coach? I knew exactly what I wanted from the players, and the players knew exactly what I wanted, and they delivered. Hard work was extremely inportant to me as a coach, and the players bought in. I had a concept of a press, and could teach it to my players, and they could run it. Pretty obvious in watching the play.

I think in hiring a new coach, one can glean pretty much all you need to know just by watching his team play. This is harder in business. The decisions are not as visible. The leadership is not as visible in many cases. (Although in retrospect one can see the brilliance of Steve Jobs' vision).

Want to drive a car? Pass the driver's test. Want to hire a musician? Based on an interview? No. Want to select a football player in a draft, as with the Ottawa RedBlacks? Well, they didn't get to interview the guys. But IMO they had plenty of information to make good choices.

A point I am making is that in football it seems to me the interview process is an empty sham. It proves nothing. It does little or nothing to find you a good coach. Look at the example presented by South Pender, the Cleveland Browns. The management believed in the interview process. The applicants hit home runs in the interviews. And what did they get? Duds.

I have great respect for Jim Popp. But even his record is spotted. He hired Marc Trestman. Great. Earlier he hired Don Matthews. Kind of a no brainer, obvious selection. Then he hired Dan Hawkins. Ouch.

For Head Coach, I would say look for the best results from candidates as OC or DC. Look at their previous performance as coaches. Look for the effort of the players. Look for the attitude of the players. Look for the character of the team. Look for resilience. How the candidate does in an interview is irrelevant, it seems to me. Just a getting to know you session. If you do not have an opportunity to judge the candidate's performance, you are in the dark. Trial runs (probationary periods) give a pretty good view of a candidate. One cannot really do that with a football coach. Although one could say that Hawkins failed his trial, and was fired early.
.........

Some things lend themselves to intuition. Lehrer's book gives the example of a TV director. He watches countless applicants for a role. Suddenly he sees one guy, who does not even know the lines, as they were just handed to him, and the director knows instinctively that he is the guy. How? Years of experience. And the director might not even be able to verbalize exactly what it was that made it clear, but he knew. That is beyond a rational decision.

Room for both, a need for both: the rational and the more emotional, the intuitive.
............

Just IMO ...
John Madden's Team Policies: Be on time. Pay attention. Play like hell on game day.

Jimmy Johnson's Game Keys: Protect the ball. Make plays.

Walter Payton's Advice to Kids: Play hard. Play fair. Have fun.
User avatar
notahomer
Hall of Famer
Posts: 6258
Joined: Sat Nov 16, 2002 12:09 pm
Location: Vancouver

In my opinion, culture is an important aspect of whom should get hired.

For e.g. taking a look at teams like Cardinals, Browns, Falcons, Bengals in the NFL. They have something in common with the Saints prior to New Orleans hiring of Sean Payton as head coach. The Saints were a 'sad sack' franchise for DECADES, IMO. Then their hometown gets majorily impacted by a hurricane causing loss of life and finances. Sean Payton comes along and changes the culture of that football team, FOREVER. The SadSackSaints are no more, IMO. Yes the Bountygate is a purrfect example that Payton has NOT impacted culture in totality. But it seems like he's changed how things are done.

Wally did those same kinds of things when he arrived here and will they guarantee success forever? Of course not but the change in culture is certainly something I hope is maintained.

In the hiring decisions I've been part of culture is certainly part of the process. There have been some science based changes that allow people to regurgitate what they think is meant by mentioning the mantras. But, situational concepts usually trip up the well-prepared. Often people who may not have the jargon down pat, are able to score well on case scenarios (usually based on prior concerns) because what they are expressing is truly what they are speaking instead of simply saying what most people WANT TO HEAR.

I've been the interviewee a few times in this panel format. I have NEVER interviewed for a job I HAD to have. Just by being honest and admitting I didn't know, I have done well in panel interviews. I obviously do NOT know how I scored or what people thought of my interview. I, personally, find being interviewed for a position FAR EASIER than being one of the panel of interviewers. Often there is ONE BRIGHT STAR who clearly deserves the position but sometimes its very close. One other challenge is I do often end up meeting failed candidates who are puzzled why they were not hired. The ones who seem to get hired elsewhere seem to want to know what they could do better next time rather than simply wanting to know WHY NOT ME?
User avatar
cromartie
Hall of Famer
Posts: 5004
Joined: Thu Oct 03, 2002 2:31 pm
Location: Cleveland, usually

I can't recommend 'How We Decide' enough, regardless of where you reside on the decision making scale. His central points on how Sunk Costs impact our decision making are valuable for everyone in their everyday life.
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

So what does Dan Snyder want in a Head Coach?

They have interviewed Perry Fewell of the Giants.

They have requested meetings with 6 more coaches.

They are considering Greg Roman, Vic Fangio and Ken Whisenhunt.

They will interview James Franklin of Vanderbilt.

Jon Gruden might be on their list.

LOL

Any good coaches there? Absolutely.

Any chance any of them can succeed in Washington? I don't think so. An interfering owner. A seemingly headstrong, out of control quarterback. A totally dysfunctional organization. Good luck.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/re ... story.html

Sally Jenkins' column has with withering criticism of RGIII. Wasn't it just a couple of years ago that he seemed like the All American hero? I guess that is what Dan Snyder can do to athletes that he admires and empowers.
John Madden's Team Policies: Be on time. Pay attention. Play like hell on game day.

Jimmy Johnson's Game Keys: Protect the ball. Make plays.

Walter Payton's Advice to Kids: Play hard. Play fair. Have fun.
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

Will Robert Griffin III help or hurt the next Washington Redskins coach?

By Sally Jenkins, Published: January 6E-mail the writer

Previous Washington Redskins coaches only had to deal with one divisive influence at the top of the franchise. Now there are two. The next head coach will have to cope not just with owner-supremo Daniel Snyder’s interference, but with the added complication of a 23-year-old boy emperor who believes he can dictate everything from the play-calling to what’s served at training table. You don’t like eggs? Take it up with Robert Griffin III.

On the surface, the presence of Griffin should be a lure for a head coach: Who wouldn’t want to work with an electromagnetic talent who just needs some schooling as a dropback passer to become one of the most powerful weapons in the league, right? That’s how it should be. But it’s not.

Instead, any head coaching candidate will be hesitant about working with a player whose rampant owner-empowered entitlement was clearly part of the team’s problem this season. Once, Griffin was an immensely likable, unpretentious kid who was wide open to collaboration. But according to insiders, Griffin’s public campaign to have the offense altered for him was just the tip of his egotism in his second year. Behind closed doors, Griffin had fierce finger-pointing tensions with his wide receivers, and he bragged to teammates that he could procure favors from the owner and influence the franchise’s direction.

The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder, but never this badly. If they wind up with a decent coach, it will be because there are twice as many candidates as there are openings, so Snyder and General Manager Bruce Allen can’t help but make a competent hire. The problem is, it doesn’t matter who they get. The new coach will be twice-hamstrung before he walks in the door.

Try winning with a quarterback who has alienated his receivers and members of the offensive line. Any head coaching candidate has to be concerned about the locker room bad blood we all saw evidence of this season. Griffin sat on the ground after sacks and no one helped him up. We all heard, too, Pierre Garcon’s barely contained anger, and Santana Moss’s remarkable public lecture that Griffin needed to quit blaming others and take responsibility for his own failures. It was a significant break with protocol and suggested how badly relationships had eroded; players almost always feel duty-bound to support their quarterback.

The perennial optimists at Redskins Park will try to sell a coaching hire on the idea that they can become next season’s Kansas City Chiefs, who went from 2-14 to the playoffs in just a season thanks to the partnership between new Coach Andy Reid and quarterback Alex Smith. Why can’t the Redskins do the same? But any candidate has to be concerned that the Redskins’ dynamic is the exact opposite: When a team goes from the playoffs to 3-13 in the space of just a year, it’s because something unhealthy has poisoned it.

What coach with other offers would opt for a job in which the perception is that you can be trumped on any decision, from play-calling to personnel, by a third-year QB? Whomever the Redskins hire, his job will depend on placating Griffin. It’s plain that Griffin hasn’t yet learned to read coverages or where to go with the ball against them — but it’s not plain that Griffin understands his own shortcomings. He appears to view himself as a finished dropback passer who simply wasn’t given adequate help from fired coach Mike Shanahan. The lesson from this season is that he has the power to discard any part of the playbook he dislikes, and if his sack numbers are high, it will be the fault of the protections, not him.

In fairness to Griffin, not every story about his ego is true, and he is so young that he genuinely may not understand how he was perceived, especially in the flash of stardom. Griffin complained in November about “character assassination” after a false report that he didn’t want his bad plays shown in the film room. The problem is, he supplied too many legitimate reasons to think such a thing might be true. He didn’t take much blame for the season, while parading his enormous license as the owner’s favorite.

No wonder backup Kirk Cousins said last week he believes Griffin will have a major say who becomes the new head coach. “I’m sure Mr. Snyder and Robert and those people will have a lot of input as to who the hire is,” Cousins said to reporters last week as he and his teammates cleaned out their lockers at Redskins Park.

The team promptly issued a statement denying that Griffin will be consulted on coaching candidates. Which by itself was strange and signaled oversensitivity. The Detroit Lions weren’t self-conscious about quarterback Matthew Stafford meeting with Jim Caldwell during his job interview there, nor did they have to issue any clarifications about Stafford’s role in the process. The Redskins clearly have concerns about Griffin appearing too involved.

Griffin is young, with a beautiful long horizon ahead of him, and there is no reason why he can’t use this season as corrective, and go on to fulfill all of his promise. But for that to happen, he has to recognize how badly wrong he went and how much he has to learn about leadership. Reports are that the Redskins are indeed pursuing Griffin’s college coach, Art Briles. Whoever the hire is, his first priority will be to pry Griffin from the owner’s orbit, and help him rediscover himself. That will be a delicate repair job. But the person with the most repairing to do is Griffin.
John Madden's Team Policies: Be on time. Pay attention. Play like hell on game day.

Jimmy Johnson's Game Keys: Protect the ball. Make plays.

Walter Payton's Advice to Kids: Play hard. Play fair. Have fun.
User avatar
WestCoastJoe
Hall of Famer
Posts: 17721
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 8:55 pm

Previous Washington Redskins coaches only had to deal with one divisive influence at the top of the franchise. Now there are two. The next head coach will have to cope not just with owner-supremo Daniel Snyder’s interference, but with the added complication of a 23-year-old boy emperor who believes he can dictate everything from the play-calling to what’s served at training table. You don’t like eggs? Take it up with Robert Griffin III.
Ouch.
On the surface, the presence of Griffin should be a lure for a head coach: Who wouldn’t want to work with an electromagnetic talent who just needs some schooling as a dropback passer to become one of the most powerful weapons in the league, right? That’s how it should be. But it’s not.
Instead, any head coaching candidate will be hesitant about working with a player whose rampant owner-empowered entitlement was clearly part of the team’s problem this season. Once, Griffin was an immensely likable, unpretentious kid who was wide open to collaboration. But according to insiders, Griffin’s public campaign to have the offense altered for him was just the tip of his egotism in his second year. Behind closed doors, Griffin had fierce finger-pointing tensions with his wide receivers, and he bragged to teammates that he could procure favors from the owner and influence the franchise’s direction.

The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder, but never this badly. If they wind up with a decent coach, it will be because there are twice as many candidates as there are openings, so Snyder and General Manager Bruce Allen can’t help but make a competent hire. The problem is, it doesn’t matter who they get. The new coach will be twice-hamstrung before he walks in the door.
Try winning with a quarterback who has alienated his receivers and members of the offensive line. Any head coaching candidate has to be concerned about the locker room bad blood we all saw evidence of this season. Griffin sat on the ground after sacks and no one helped him up. We all heard, too, Pierre Garcon’s barely contained anger, and Santana Moss’s remarkable public lecture that Griffin needed to quit blaming others and take responsibility for his own failures. It was a significant break with protocol and suggested how badly relationships had eroded; players almost always feel duty-bound to support their quarterback.
What coach with other offers would opt for a job in which the perception is that you can be trumped on any decision, from play-calling to personnel, by a third-year QB? Whomever the Redskins hire, his job will depend on placating Griffin. It’s plain that Griffin hasn’t yet learned to read coverages or where to go with the ball against them — but it’s not plain that Griffin understands his own shortcomings. He appears to view himself as a finished dropback passer who simply wasn’t given adequate help from fired coach Mike Shanahan. The lesson from this season is that he has the power to discard any part of the playbook he dislikes, and if his sack numbers are high, it will be the fault of the protections, not him.
The circus continues in Washington. Different news than the old days, pre-Snyder. All about dysfunction now. Not about the Hogs and Jon Riggins running over people. Not about success on the field.

Who will Snyder hire? What does it matter? How do you fire an owner? The only answer is for fans to stay away.
John Madden's Team Policies: Be on time. Pay attention. Play like hell on game day.

Jimmy Johnson's Game Keys: Protect the ball. Make plays.

Walter Payton's Advice to Kids: Play hard. Play fair. Have fun.
South Pender
Legend
Posts: 2779
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:24 am
Location: Vancouver weekdays; Gulf Islands on weekends

Toppy Vann wrote: SP mentions Gary Latham - and here are a wealth of his papers. He gave a lecture years ago and I recall telling SFU's Dean of Business in the late 70s IIRC hire this guy but they were luke warm on him yet he was practical and theoretical. That Dean wanted more theory I guess or feared his great ability to communicate. Dunno.
Knowing Gary, I doubt that he would have accepted an offer at SFU (or UBC for that matter) had one been extended. He'd tasted the big money at Weyerhaeuser by then and eventually ended up--again for big money--at the U. of Washington. Neither SFU nor UBC could have afforded him at the time. With the arrival of a new Dean at U Dub, Gary jumped to the Rotman School at the U of T--again, I'm sure, for very large dollars. I'm not implying that Gary is greedy, just that he has high value and knows it. Maybe the reason the SFU Dean of the day was lukewarm to Gary was that he was trained in a Psychology department as an I/O psychologist, and never, to my knowledge, saw the inside of a business school until he was hired by one!
Toppy Vann wrote:This Canadian company - Self Management Group (I use their low cost, high quality surveys) has also worked with NHL teams to select future good draft picks. Their psychometric tests are good predictors of success in some jobs and industries. You don't use this or any tool as the sole device for selection! These tests are normative meaning that results are scored against others in the data base who are proven in the field. These are good for job selection but I know dozens of HR folks using ipsative tests that are great at assessing social styles or super for team building and making hiring decisions off these.
As you note ipsatively-scored tests can be very useful for career-development, team-building, and other developmental activities, but are essentially illogical as a basis for selection purposes since the criterion to be predicted is itself normative (a rank-ordering of employees wrt their job performance). Undoubtedly the most widely-used ipsative measure worldwide (at least that I know about) would be the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) (developed in the basement by two sisters), but it has never been recommended by its publisher for personnel-selection purposes. And publishers of other ipsative scales and multi-scale instruments are generally pretty clear (and they should be) about not recommending these particular instruments for selection. This isn't, however, to say that some researcher might not conduct a predictive-validity study and find a positive and significant correlation between some ipsatively-scored measure and some normative performance criterion, but this, although possible, would be unlikely and unexpected given the nature of ipsative scoring. I've been an expert witness in enough arbitration hearings to know how risky it would be to try to defend an ipsative measure in a hiring case.
Toppy Vann wrote:The best predictor for selection are Assessment Centers but the costs preclude many from using this.
Yes, assessment centers are very predictive (I've designed and run a lot of them), but are seldom used for non-management positions. It would be hard to visualize an assessment center for coach-hiring, but I could see one used with an existing coaching staff. The latter would be a really interesting experience and might pay dividends to the team innovative enough to consider it.
South Pender
Legend
Posts: 2779
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 9:24 am
Location: Vancouver weekdays; Gulf Islands on weekends

WestCoastJoe wrote:
Previous Washington Redskins coaches only had to deal with one divisive influence at the top of the franchise. Now there are two. The next head coach will have to cope not just with owner-supremo Daniel Snyder’s interference, but with the added complication of a 23-year-old boy emperor who believes he can dictate everything from the play-calling to what’s served at training table. You don’t like eggs? Take it up with Robert Griffin III.
Ouch.
On the surface, the presence of Griffin should be a lure for a head coach: Who wouldn’t want to work with an electromagnetic talent who just needs some schooling as a dropback passer to become one of the most powerful weapons in the league, right? That’s how it should be. But it’s not.
Instead, any head coaching candidate will be hesitant about working with a player whose rampant owner-empowered entitlement was clearly part of the team’s problem this season. Once, Griffin was an immensely likable, unpretentious kid who was wide open to collaboration. But according to insiders, Griffin’s public campaign to have the offense altered for him was just the tip of his egotism in his second year. Behind closed doors, Griffin had fierce finger-pointing tensions with his wide receivers, and he bragged to teammates that he could procure favors from the owner and influence the franchise’s direction.

The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder, but never this badly. If they wind up with a decent coach, it will be because there are twice as many candidates as there are openings, so Snyder and General Manager Bruce Allen can’t help but make a competent hire. The problem is, it doesn’t matter who they get. The new coach will be twice-hamstrung before he walks in the door.
Try winning with a quarterback who has alienated his receivers and members of the offensive line. Any head coaching candidate has to be concerned about the locker room bad blood we all saw evidence of this season. Griffin sat on the ground after sacks and no one helped him up. We all heard, too, Pierre Garcon’s barely contained anger, and Santana Moss’s remarkable public lecture that Griffin needed to quit blaming others and take responsibility for his own failures. It was a significant break with protocol and suggested how badly relationships had eroded; players almost always feel duty-bound to support their quarterback.
What coach with other offers would opt for a job in which the perception is that you can be trumped on any decision, from play-calling to personnel, by a third-year QB? Whomever the Redskins hire, his job will depend on placating Griffin. It’s plain that Griffin hasn’t yet learned to read coverages or where to go with the ball against them — but it’s not plain that Griffin understands his own shortcomings. He appears to view himself as a finished dropback passer who simply wasn’t given adequate help from fired coach Mike Shanahan. The lesson from this season is that he has the power to discard any part of the playbook he dislikes, and if his sack numbers are high, it will be the fault of the protections, not him.
The circus continues in Washington. Different news than the old days, pre-Snyder. All about dysfunction now. Not about the Hogs and Jon Riggins running over people. Not about success on the field.

Who will Snyder hire? What does it matter? How do you fire an owner? The only answer is for fans to stay away.
Super-interesting developments, Joe. On one point, though, I'm not so sure. And that is whether RGIII was made a prima donna by Snyder's treatment. This behaviour by Snyder undoubtedly contributed to some enlargement of RGIII's head, but I'm guessing that when he came out of college with the huge rep and paycheck, the seeds of excessive pride (Alexander Pope's "never failing vice of fools") had been firmly planted and were already in germination.
Post Reply