On Leader Selection
After reading Sam Walker’s book titled “Captains Class”, it confirmed my experience that the best leaders are those who are “fit” to lead the specific organization at a specific time in its history. Since retiring from the Marines in 2016, my consulting company averaged about 4 executive searches per year until 2020 when it completed 10 . Over this period, almost all of the searches turned out well, but in two presidential searches the Board made the wrong choice from the finalists, and the selected candidate was a dismal failure. Ostensibly this occurs when a strong personality is leading the search committee or Board and is able to convince the membership to select someone he/she likes, the candidate will come at a more favorable price point, or both.
Leadership and management is a complex subject with many variables that affect the chosen leader’s chances for success. Leadership selection is so complex that there are few absolutes in predicting the success of a leader and thus, the many leadership theories, traits, and characteristics of a leader can fall short in predicting success.
Like so, “Executive Courage - Sometimes You Have to Walk Point” is rightfully subject to criticism and disagreement if one changes the variables in my assertions. There is much effort devoted to the types of leaders that possess the characteristics to successfully turnaround a failing organization. Simplistically, the “fit” is critical to the selection of turnaround leaders, but unfortunately selection committees/Boards often focus on personality/likeability, polish, academic credentials, and oratory skills in candidates for turnaround challenges. When truly, what is needed in a turnaround is one who is results-focused, fearless in decision-making and risk-taking, accountability-seeking, and possessing of a track record of success in turning around departments or other organizations.
“Fit” for the position is a critical criteria for selection committees and Boards to pursue. They must ask the question, “What kind of leader do we need first and foremost?” If the organization is stable, harmonious, and performing, it doesn’t need a stasis-busting, risk-taking, barn-burning change specialist. But, if it is under-performing to the extent that its very survival is a stake, then the committee must find a candidate who is confident, competent, and willing to rattle the cages.