Being Fair to Seth Godin...

Last week, I panned a Forbes article that positioned the selection process of an intern program by Seth Godin as being bleeding edge.  To reinforce and be fair to Seth, I basically said I loved his work, this site includes 2 books from Seth on the recommended reading sidebar, but I wasn't drinking the Kool-Aid on his survivor-type selection process as a best practice.

Seth checked in with a comment, which is worth republishing here:

"Thanks Kris, I appreciate the feedback.

I need to start by challenging the tone and nature of the Forbes article. It was really hurtful to me and my team, mostly because it wasn't true and also because I invited them in as a favor. We weren't seeking to hype what we are doing here.

I don't think I ever said that people should hire the way I chose the people for the program. What fascinated me is that the nine picked PRECISELY the same nine people that I had already picked. The gulf was obvious and the crowd (the 27) saw that.

I can tell you that getting into Stanford Business School was not only less organized than my process was, it was also significantly less effective. Every single one of the 9 in the program are amazing. Not one bad pick. Maybe that's luck or maybe Stanford ought to consider something similar...

But no, I'd never do this for "real" long term jobs, mostly because it's unlikely a real long term job would be as parallel a process as school is."

In the spirit of focusing on additional thoughts, reader Michelle chimed in with thoughts similar to Seth's regarding using the exercise as an evaluation, rather than selection tool:

"I think it would be crazy to let the group make the final decision, but it is an interesting concept. One thing I do like is learning how each candidate would assess and select individuals. I think their recommendations along with how they developed those decisions would provide insight into their own skills and what they look for when selecting talent."

Good thoughts.  Don't rely on the method for selection, but it certainly could be used if you have the time to evaluate the judgment and decision-making criteria of the candidate's concerned.    

PS - for my money, if you read one Seth Godin book, it's "Small is the New Big".  Find it on the left sidebar on this page.

Comments

[Seth Godin]

Thanks for the kind words! I like that book too.

[Rhys Southan]

With this and The Power of Small - http://tinyurl.com/cmdxg6 - it looks like there is a "small revolution" afoot. No matter what change politicians are talking about enacting through government, the real change is going to come in the re-structuring of business and society in favor of the smaller.

[Justin]

What about succession planning through this process, sounds similar to how Jack Welch was apparently chosen at GE, from an HBR article:

"He [Reg Jones] chose a novel and peculiar way of selecting his successor, asking each candidate in turn whom they would recommend as CEO if the candidate and Jones were both killed in a plane crash. In a second round of interviews, he gave the candidates the opportunity to name themselves as well as other candidates.

As a result of these double rounds of interviews, Jones chose Welch, someone who could not have been more unlike Jones in demeanor and background, someone who had made his name in one of GE's lesser ventures, plastics, and yet someone who obviously had the qualities to lead GE through massive change to the top of the world in terms of corporate value."