There is so much talk about "experience" during these elections that I thought we should take a look back at the importance of experience. Abraham Lincoln was one of the most inexperienced Presidents that ever governed the United States - and he did so during one of the most tumultuous times in its history. Now, in retrospect, people think of him as one of the greatest leaders and his vision sits cast in stone at the Lincoln Memorial.
When the colonies were forming the United States King George and his cronies laughed about their ability to form and manage a country - why? No Experience in Governing. The constitution and Declaration of independence clearly reflect that "young and inexperienced spirit" in their language and tone. Experience is not listed as a qualification to be President.
So in light of the somewhat amateur political bent and history, why this obsession with experience. Because it makes people feel safe, comfortable and as though they know what to expect? All reasons that history has shown to be false to some degree.
The business world is no different - Executive Bios are full of "history" and "experience". When companies search for help they often limit themselves and tie their peoples hands by requiring "experience within our industry". This is especially critical when you look to hire sales people because often "sales ability" cannot be taught but the "industry lingo and processes" can be.
Instead of focusing on Experience- most companies would do well to look at Character, Natural Ability and Weaknesses as they make a hiring decision.
Experience is often a synonym for "baggage" and it comes at a heavy price financially. Imagine you are often paying more to get that - does that make you feel comfortable and safe?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment