Passive Candidates, Top Talent, and New Math

Recently I've seen a deluge of comments in social media forums, Q&A sections, and even advertisements suggesting that to hire successfully you must find those who are not looking for a new job - also known as "passive candidates." The prevailing thought among many seems to be that the best folks in the talent pool are passive candidates.

Sounds theoretically possible, right? Heck, it's good enough for an argument among those who follow broken traditional recruiting processes. But that's not even the most disturbing part of the logic.

One of the commentators revealed more than he may have realized when, as he asked for tips and tricks to find passive candidates, he stated that he's got to find more because they are the top talent he needs.

Stop the presses!

In mathematical terms, that particular logic trail looks like this:

          Top Talent = Passive Candidates
                          therefore
          Passive Candidates = Top Talent

In other words, if top talent generally comes from passive candidates, then I must focus my searches on passive candidates because they are top talent. What is created by this faulty logic is an assumption that passive candidates have a high probability of being top talent. This assumption often results in less stringent qualification processes, and no surprise, underwhelming performance.

By their own definition, passive candidates are not looking for a job. But let's qualify that for a minute.

What if:

• She just hasn't applied for the specific job you represent, but she has resumes out in a few discreet locations
• He's an imposter in the very center of his con, and riding out this economic downturn is a perfect cover
• She's earning an advanced degree and can do her present job on autopilot

None of these people are looking for jobs, so they are passive candidates by definition. Does that make any one of them top talent? Let's not be foolish.

When I read of someone putting so much emphasis on passive candidates, I see someone who is trying to find the easy route to hiring. There is no substitute for applying consistent, stringent processes that follow a path begun in the correct spot with the right performance measurements. It's what we call, "Hire hard to manage easy."

Here's a helpful visual just in case you should run across the topic of passive candidates in the future:

          Passive candidates ≠ Top Talent

Leadership Lessons from the Super Bowl

What a spectacular Super Bowl XLIII! Congratulations to both teams for rising to the top of the game and presenting a truly valiant fight. I'm from Pittsburgh, so I'm a die-hard Steelers fan, win or lose. This past season, the Steelers reinforced the lesson that the game is 60 minutes long, many times winning in the last few minutes of numerous games. It might make your heart pound, but that's Steelers football.

Both teams showed brilliant performances, but what made the critical difference? While I would normally proclaim from a high soapbox that talent trumps all and show the evidence to back it up, I have to say in this case that leadership developed loyalty from their talent, and that trumped all.

First, let me say that the Cardinals executed incredibly well versus the top-ranked defense in the league. They were led by someone, who in my opinion, is one of the most standup people in the NFL, and surely deserving of a Hall of Fame entry somewhere down the line. The entire Cardinals team, and particularly Kurt Warner, having nothing to be ashamed of. Quite frankly, even if we (the Steelers' Nation) had lost, it would not have been as devastating to me as if another team had beaten the Steelers.

In the aftermath, I took a look at the Steelers organization from the top-down. It was just remarkable that so many Steelers players attributed their success to the Rooney family. After reviewing numerous articles about the newest Super Bowl Champions, there were several things that stood out among others in terms of leadership and teambuilding:

• The Rooneys as leaders take their jobs seriously and are present every day, both in body and mind
• Dan Rooney gives his personal cell phone number to every single player on the team - what an open-door policy!
• The Steel-town, blue-collar, never-say-die attitude transcends what most teams will ever experience

The Steelers as a team build loyalty from the top down. Because leadership is loyal to the team first, and the team as a whole is first and foremost in their minds, the team is loyal to them. There is zero tolerance to "me before the team" as witnessed in so many other teams who recruit the likes of Terrell Owens and many others who believe their talent transcends the team itself. Think about how many players thanked the Rooney family and ask yourself the question, "Would this have happened in Dallas or Oakland?" There's little doubt that anyone would have personally thanked either Jerry Jones or Al Davis. It's sad, but true because they neglect the model that my good friend Mark Herbert suggests, which is Compliance to Commitment. In other words, creating loyalty is a priority for the Steelers leadership because they know that when they display loyalty to the team, the team executes with loyalty to leadership. It's engagement at its finest.

Through good times and bad, the Steelers have endured to become the leading dynasty in recent history. Leadership in the Steelers organization has instilled a model to create the most loyal team and fans in the NFL. And they vote with their feet, not just their voice. Congratulations to the Steelers becoming the first team with six (6!) Super Bowl rings! Now let's treat this lesson as more than just a fan-favored event and apply it to business.