Never Assume the Decision Maker Shares Your Criteria

One of the most valuable lessons I've learned came from a job I didn't get.

Years ago, I applied to become General Manager of Burlington Electric Department.  After a lengthy search, I was selected as the internal finalist and another candidate emerged as the external finalist.  Throughout the process, everyone involved seemed to be evaluating candidates using a fairly traditional set of criteria.

Experience.

Industry knowledge.

Leadership ability.

Credibility.

The ability to manage an increasingly complex utility.

At least that was how I viewed it.

By the time the process reached the Mayor, I thought I understood the decision that was about to be made.  Then the Mayor rejected both finalists and hired someone else entirely.  The decision surprised many of the people involved in the process, but it didn't take me long to understand it.

The Mayor gave me the news as I was attending my granddaughter’s dance recital in Philadelphia, giving me multiple hours to stew on the result while driving home.  As I considered the Mayor’s background, and that of the person he had chosen, the decision started to make sense. He wasn't solving the same problem everyone else was.

Most of us were evaluating the role through the lens of utility leadership.  The Mayor was evaluating a broader role.  He wasn't primarily looking for a utility executive.  He was looking for someone who could carry the political weight of the position within the context of his administration and his vision for the city.  The utility expertise mattered.  It just wasn't the deciding factor.

Years later, one of my board members told me a story that completely validated my conclusion.  During the city’s Public Works Director search, which occurred at roughly the same time, the Mayor had called him to discuss a candidate.  According to my board member, the Mayor wasn't interested in the candidate's public works expertise. He wanted to know whether the candidate had the political skills to carry the position.  The moment I heard that story, my experience fit a broader pattern.

 The hiring decision for Burlington Electric had never really been about choosing between two utility professionals.  It had been about finding someone who could carry the administration’s broader objectives through the utility.

That experience taught me something I've seen repeatedly ever since.  People spend enormous amounts of time evaluating options and shoring up their positions for the decision they think is being made.  Far fewer spend time understanding the objectives of the person making the decision. 

Boards assume management values the same outcomes they do.  Management assumes regulators are solving the same problem they are.  Negotiators assume the other side shares their priorities.  Candidates assume they understand the hiring criteria.  Often they don't.

One of the most useful questions I've learned to ask is:  What problem is the decision maker trying to solve?  Not the problem I think they should solve.  Not the problem I would solve.  The problem they are actually solving.

The problem isn't that people don't understand the solutions. The problem is that they misunderstand which decision is actually being made.