Assessing the Lineup
Baseball season is upon us and the news is filled with stories of teams assessing their lineups. They’re assessing their strengths and weaknesses to be sure the right players are in the right positions.
Players who were A–list in prior years may not have as big a role on this year’s team. Times often require a change to the lineup in response to current competitive conditions. Trades, retirements, additional training, and other changes on- and off-field play an important part in the club’s success or failure.
Cut to the business pages of the same newspaper and the stories are similar. Companies are making personnel changes at a fast clip as they assess their lineups. Most obvious are the layoffs, many of which have come in the dot-com and technology sectors.
This segment is getting a lot of the press, but when companies in a variety of industries are making similar changes, it becomes obvious that this is not a situation isolated to the tech sector. Some layoffs are corrections for what has been termed the "irrational exuberance" of the past couple of years.
Interestingly, the changes that have occurred to date have not had a material impact on the unemployment rate. The layoff press releases often include the words "attrition," "over time," and "early retirement." And laid-off employees still seem to have other opportunities. Many small- to medium-sized businesses say they are now able to attract people who were unavailable even a few months ago. These companies are strengthening their lineups by taking advantage of layoffs at larger companies.
Organizations must regularly assess their lineups in light of both static and changing economic and market conditions. Static conditions often indicate that the time is right to become more aware of organizational needs and to make changes that can lead to growth. During changing economic conditions, companies must be sure that the organization is well positioned to weather the changing climate and take advantage of opportunities that may arise.
Personnel changes are difficult for many. Certainly, determining who should be laid off is never an easy task, even for the most experienced and/or callous managers.
Perhaps that is why some companies, as a matter of policy, regularly prune the poorest performing 5–10% of their staffs. It helps them maintain their competitive advantage. There is no "season" to make changes; it is a continuous process. There is no such thing as a guaranteed job in these organizations.
But hiring new people is not always an easy task either. There are many things to be considered, not only whether the candidate has the necessary skills and experience to do the job. Very often, that is not the primary reason for hiring, or for that matter, firing someone.
Among the many factors to be considered is how the candidate fits in with the "corporate culture." When we see a news story about an executive leaving an organization to "pursue other opportunities" after a relatively short time on the job, it may not have been a question of ability, but of personality.
Adapting to a new environment is often difficult. Frequently, organizational dynamics do not easily let a new person in. Flexibility may not be in the organization’s lexicon, and diversity of opinion may not be welcomed.
Yet hiring someone who "fits the mold" is not always the right decision, either. Hiring "more of the same" can often be detrimental to the organization over the long term. In a changing and dynamic economic climate, the gadfly may make a better long-term contribution to the organization than the "yes-man" (or "yes-person" in today’s jargon).
It is sometimes for this reason that companies bring in entrepreneurs to set up and run new subsidiaries outside of the daily corporate purview, allowing them to establish the organization with its own set of values and economics, in essence creating an "expansion team."
However implemented, it is clear that organizations must regularly assess their lineups. It must be a continuing process to enable the organization to meet changing business conditions.
