In today’s business environment, interpersonal skills are viewed as a highly sought-after capability in the individuals most corporations elect to bring onto their team. And, no doubt, a certain level of proficiency and effectiveness in this regard is required as part of any given candidate’s skill set. Having said that, our experience, based on observing literally hundreds of organizations, over decades, suggests companies place too much emphasis on interpersonal capabilities throughout the candidate evaluation process.
While this topic could be explored to a degree that far exceeds the space here, there are, nevertheless two significant pitfalls when companies put too much weight on interpersonal skills when making hiring decisions.
First, many people hide a host of mental disorders and significant personality flaws behind a mask of well-honed “people” skills. For starters, borderlines, narcissists, psychopaths, clinical hysterics and many others can have, on the surface, apparently good interpersonal capabilities. Given that about 10% of the at-large population has a mental disorder, straight-up math implies that one in every ten people being interviewed has the potential to be seriously mentally ill. And, as previously mentioned, many of these folks are difficult to identify in the evaluation process – precisely because of “surface” interpersonal skills. To further complicate the whole issue, while 10% of the population have very significant mental health problems, a much larger group suffer from a host of “garden variety” personality flaws that can also have a very negative impact on your organization. Middle managers who cannot set limits and hold their team accountable; folks who cannot work independently when required; people who cannot make decisions; those who are determined to misrepresent and misdirect; sins of omission; excessive defensiveness; and a multitude of other issues can be perfectly hidden during most interview processes – many times because of an interviewer becoming too enamoured with a candidate’s interpersonal presentation.
Second, while it is clear that interpersonal skills are essential for many roles, especially at lower levels in organizations, they actually become much less of a selector for assessing your senior team’s competencies – especially as it concerns VP’s and other individuals who are being selected for executive roles. In fact, in most cases, it is rare for individuals who are highly socialized, outgoing, “get-along go-along” people to be effective line executives. In most cases, selecting a candidate for an elevated role, with too much emphasis on people skills, is almost a sure-fire recipe for poor performance at C-suite levels – especially in those organizations that are experiencing change, growth and ambiguity.
So many of these “problem children” manage to get hired into an organization because of apparently good “people” skills, but turn out to be “hell-on-earth,” for any number of reasons after they get onboard. Clearly, in a perfect world, it is ideal to be able to hire people who have both good personalities and healthy underlying psychology. But that opportunity is not always available to us as employers. Being willing to carefully consider those who are somewhat socially awkward or do not possess flawless people skills may be an excellent alternative. After all, in the end, our guess is that, given the choice, it is likely you would rather work with someone who is a bit “rough around the edges” but is also trustworthy, down-to-earth and reliable, than with someone who has “flawless” interpersonal skills who you cannot count on when it really matters.
Getting Past The Façade
Be Aware. One of the best things one can do to deal with this problem is to simply be aware of it. Make a mental note to yourself that the next time you are interacting with someone in an interview, be a little more wary of a person who displays very well rounded “people skills.” Don’t allow yourself to become too enamoured. Stay alert and ask all of your questions.
Excessive Defensiveness. Defensiveness (blaming others and not taking responsibility for one’s actions) is the single biggest characteristic we recommend you watch for. We are speaking about those people who, essentially, in their view, have no weaknesses. Or, if they do, it’s only because “my weaknesses are due to someone else’s failures.” When asked about required areas of development in an interview, these are the ones who will say any of the following:
….I work too hard
…I only get impatient because other people let me down
…My career is not advancing because recruiters do not recognize my talent
…My work standards are too high for people to handle
…I cannot think of anything that I have done wrong
…This is the way I am
You get the idea. Most often, no matter how good someone’s “interpersonal skills” may appear to be, those people who are really “blocked” and have little or no self-awareness are doomed to fail. At the very least, these individuals will “max out” at fairly junior levels because they do not have the ability to adapt, learn and grow. For more senior individuals, defensiveness is a major impairment to performance. It is quite common to discover that these types of people present fairly well in an interview – they can posture with apparently well developed in “people-interaction” skills. Given the propensity for failure, it is highly recommended that you avoid hiring anyone who displays serious defensiveness during an interview.
There is one more item about defensiveness that does need to be pointed out. There are some folks who are both quite intelligent and highly defensive. These people have developed interview capabilities that, to the unsophisticated interviewer, appear to be quite open and genuine. When questioned about mistakes and opportunities for growth, these folks can provide you with a list of areas requiring personal improvement. To “smoke out” these “adapters,” ensure to ask any and all people, who are apparently candid about their weaknesses, the following question: “Where do your weaknesses hurt your performance?” If their answer is something along the lines of “They don’t impact my performance at all,” you now know you are looking at a person who is just as defensive and “locked away” but perhaps, more intelligent than some.
The loyalty factor. Most times, people with “surface” interpersonal skills, upon query, will tell you that loyalty is one of, if not the prime factor they consider to be very important. This is a problem. Regardless of whether you are interviewing a sales manager who will be required to hire a sales team across the country or an individual who will report directly to yourself, loyalty is important, to some degree, but not a dominant factor in the hiring process. What most people are really saying when they put excessive emphasis on the importance of loyalty is that they like to hire or work with people who will always be agreeable. While being agreeable and having a “get-along go-along,” “loyal” personality is workable for low-level assignments, such “pleasant” and outgoing behavior is not conducive to high-level performance. Those who will not respectfully speak their mind to the boss about how things could be done more effectively in the organization, or superiors who will not accept one of their direct reports constructively speaking out, is a recipe for disaster. Certainly, some level of loyalty is important when considering a candidate for hire – but not when it is the dominant factor. Beware of the person with good “people” skills who advises you that loyalty is a key factor in their work behavior.
Getting along with everyone. People who indicate that they have always got along with everyone they have worked with or for, are seriously imbalanced around their emphasis on interpersonal skills. People of this nature might be okay for customer service work, but certainly nothing more senior or demanding. Having disagreements, carried out in a constructive manner, is good for all. And the folks who believe that getting along with everyone is essential to having good interpersonal skills are quite mistaken.
IF PEOPLE SKILLS ARE NOT THAT IMPORTANT, WHAT IS?
So, if “people skills” are over-rated, what, dear reader, might you ask is not? My suggestion is to eliminate the word “people” and replace it with the word “listening.” That’s right, listening skills. I would have a difficult time arguing with Rachael Remen, MD, of Mill Valley, California. “The most basic and powerful way to connect to another person is to listen to them.” After all is said and done, you can disagree, debate, even somewhat stridently. But there is no more of a connection one can make with a person than to listen very carefully to another. And besides the issue of building a connection with other people, there is the rather obvious fact that, no matter who you are, no one individual has all the answers. So listening, getting input, putting your ideas aside when others have better ones, is all absolutely necessary for a healthy organization. In fact, in the final analysis, the ability to listen, at all levels, may be one of the only things that does separate healthy from unhealthy companies.
Having said that, it our experience, that listening skills are in relatively short supply. Yes, we know. Most people we speak to are of the view that their listening skills are well developed. But are they? Well, depending on the study, it seems that, on a short term basis, most people remember between 25% and 50% of what they hear. And it would my view that these figures might be, actually, rather high. It has been my observation that many people have an opinion but few know how to ask questions. Regardless of the reasons, so many folks are simply too eager to advance their opinion. They seem to believe that some sort of counter argument or opinion is essential to a discussion. You have seen it before. One person has an opinion. Then another chimes in with their opinion. And so on. Few actually ask questions, paraphrase the other person etc.
If you are seriously looking to improve your skills in this area, ask more questions in order to listen better and understand better………..”So are you really saying that……” “Why do you consider this the correct way to go?” Just so that I understand your point, I think I am hearing you say…..”
Here’s a hint to determine if your listening skills are “up to snuff.” If you are not finding the task of listening both hard work and mentally exhausting, then you are not listening well enough!
While interpersonal skills are clearly helpful and hold weight, they actually are not particularly good predictors of high-level performance. In addition to well-developed listening skills, there are many other, much more important factors that predict superior capabilities at high levels than interpersonal skills. And we will explore what exactly these are in the next edition of the Simpson Commentary. In the end, perhaps we owe it all to Dr. Henry S. Sullivan, an American psychiatrist, who, in 1938, first coined the phrase “interpersonal skills” – which he created in order to describe the behavior between people in an encounter.
