When organisations hire people, we should each be judging if they meet one of two criteria :
1. Tactical : they can be productive within a few days on the job, and they will endure for at least 3 months; for example :
- "compliance officer's day to day work"
- "help managers chase people"
2. Strategic : they may take a few weeks to be productive, but before hiring we have already determined that we would want to work with them for 2-5 years ( personally, I tend to think in-terms of 5-10 years) ; for example :
- "design and ensure that all regulatory risk is P&L-efficient"
- "ensure that the talent supply of the company is unbreakable"
Broadly organisations have short-term needs (tactical : predictable) and long-term needs (strategic : unpredictable).
TACTICAL
- we know WHAT we want people to do NOW
- candidate must be aligned with the WHAT-NOW
- time-frames usually less than 1 year :
- 3 months is a productive stay for a waiter (good "enough")
- 9 months is a productive stay for a finance clerk (2 years is pushing it ... )
- basically you expect these people to be misaligned from their role very quickly
STRATEGIC
- we don't know WHAT IF XYZ will happen LATER
- candidate must be aligned with the WHAT-IF
- time-frames usually more than 2 years :
- "I need you to find X-type of problems, and when you find them, fix them"
