ConceptsNest

  A debate about hiring for attitude versus aptitude has developed over the years. Nearly every job posting includes the type of experience an employer is seeking, which makes sense considering that companies want to locate applicants who have already demonstrated a certain level of skill in that particular industry or role.  Both the experience (hard skills) and the attitude (soft skills) are given high priority in the initial job requirements. The debate comes to light during the interview and hiring process. Although the initial requirements highlight soft skills and personality traits as important parts of the job applicant’s qualifications, during interviews, many hiring managers focus on hard skills and experience because they are easier to discuss and judge. As a result, many applicants end up being hired based exclusively on their experience rather than on their attitude. Is it better to hire people on the basis of their experience or their potential? If we believe experie

  A Story: The Work Ethic of Albert Einstein Einstein's most famous contribution to science, the general theory of relativity, was published in 1915. He won the Nobel Prize in 1921. Yet, rather than assume he was a finished product, Einstein continued to work and contribute to the field for 40 more years. Up until the moment of his death, Albert Einstein continued to squeeze every ounce of greatness out of himself. He never rested on his laurels. He continued to work even through severe physical pain and in the face of death. Einstein died of internal bleeding caused by the rupture of an abdominal aortic aneurysm. One physician familiar with Einstein’s case wrote, “For a number of years he had suffered from attacks of upper abdominal pain, which usually lasted for 2-3 days and were often accompanied by vomiting. These attacks usually occurred about every 3 or 4 months.” Einstein continued to work despite the pain. He published papers well into the 1950s. Even on the day of h

  We often wonder how successful companies continue to navigate and grow and know exactly what direction to go . The trick seems to be an almost irresponsibly aggressive approach to growing key objectives with a talented group of people.  OKR is an acronym for Objectives and Key Results —  a framework for visioning and setting goals within an organization that was popularized by Google. Today, OKR is used at a seemingly broad variety of companies, from larger established firms like Anheuser-Busch and Deloitte to younger tech companies like Eventbrite and Twitter. Therefore, what are OKRs and how do they work, and — most importantly — do they work. Many leaders ask how they can align their team to the vision and set goals within their team. What is OKR? OKR is a goal-setting methodology originally developed by Andy Grove, former CEO and Chairman of Intel. In his book,  High Output Management , he describes OKRs as being the answer to two questions: We can expand the definitions of each

  ***Continued from Chapter 01 (Covered previously: Meaning & Interpretation Of Accountability, The Blame Game, Its Impact) LINK TO CHAPTER 01 The demand for rights has become extremely popular, but when it comes to  dealing with responsibility and accountability, we lag far behind , a gap that accounts for increase in  blaming and rights proclaiming, but very few instances of personal responsibility and accountability. The better the case for victimization, the more visibility and exposure we get, and, consequently, the greater the psychological or monetary reward we receive.  The “blame game,” and the “thirst for exposure,” are just two symptoms of a widespread “responsibility avoiding” syndrome , which have afflicted individuals, groups and organizations as well. A majority of people in organizations today, when confronted with poor performance or unsatisfactory results, immediately begin to formulate excuses, rationalizations, and arguments for why they cannot be held accountab

  Most people view accountability as something that happens to them or is inflicted upon them , choosing to perceive it as a heavy burden to carry. In fact, many people think about accountability as a concept or principle to be applied only when something goes wrong or when someone else is trying to determine cause and pinpoint blame. Often, when things are moving along smoothly and failure has not yet set in, people rarely ask “Who is accountable for this or that?” It seems that only when the boat is filling up with water or the fire is out of control do people start looking around for the responsible party. The Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary defines accountability as “the fact of being responsible for your decisions or actions and expected to explain them when you are asked”. This in itself is a slightly negative connotation of accountability . “……..to explain them when you are asked’- implying a post-op view with little choice to the state of accountability . This confe