We’ve been considering creating a new permanent position in one of our tech team for four or five months. We don’t hire willy-nilly because we have almost zero turnover and have a horror of layoffs. We have a couple of folks who have been doing full or part-time contract work for us, so, because we’re a buncha chickens that like to manage risk, that group was our focus:

1> Reduced risk due to known ‘isims’
2> Reduced cost of recruitment
3> Reduced time-to-productivity

My business partner spoke to the hiring manager, let’s call her Sharon (inside joke), and she went through the exercise of describing the perfect candidate, spec’ing out the associated costs (lab, hardware, etc), the ability to push projects out faster - all the standard stuff. Then she had a think and came back to us with her preferred candidate.

We always ask the same question: Are they an “A” player?

Let me explain: Top people hire top candidates because they’re not scared of being shown up by a direct report. Second rate people are scared they don’t deserve their jobs, so they hire people they can control: third rate people. We shorten that to the headline of this post.

Sharon said that the person “had the ability to be an A player.” If she hadn’t slapped her head at what she said, I’d have used the rarely used Veto Pen!

Because we all know that an annoying habit in a job candidate is only going to get worse when you can’t get rid of them by shaking their hand on the way to the lobby.

It’s even worse when you hire a contractor who is turning in “B” work. You’re rewarding them with a permanent job, health care, and some prestige for their behavior. Plus you’re taking away the threat of instant-out-the-door. So they’re going to change their behavior why, exactly?

Look, we don’t blame Sharon for *almost* making a mistake. That is why we do things in teams - you can’t catch everything. The important thing to me was that she ‘got’ it and moved right on to figure out the right answer. That’s why she’s an “A” player.