Firing  is almost as important as Hiring - Blair McPherson

When we say firing we are not taking sacking people for gross misconduct or incompetence. We are talking about the process of moving people on who no longer have a future in the organisation. This is a no fault, no blame situation, it’s just that the shape of the organisation needs to change. Over time it has acquired a rather bloated management structure, a sort of middle age spread, plus it has to be said some destructive superstars. It’s a fairly common situation in the ageing cycle of an organisation. There needs to be a bit of a clear out. This can be problematic, these  are experienced, knowledgeable, loyal individuals with many years service. They are not incompetent, they just don’t offer that something different or special. Being willing and capable isn’t enough. They have been acquired by successive chief executives who found it easier to creat new posts to do things their way rather than take a more radical approach to hiring and firing. Non of these Chief Executives stayed long mainly because they didn’t have sufficient numbers of people able and committed to the ways they wanted to do things. So the new chief executive recognises there has to be significant movement to creat the opportunities and the budget to bring in the talent they need to make things work their way. 

 

Giving young talent, particularly home grown talent more opportunities will be popular but persuading those who don’t have the attributes to fit the new system won’t be easy, many are simply very comfortable where they are. The money is good, they aren’t as ambitious as they were, in many ways they feel they have made it. Ok, so they may find themselves marginalised, not invited on the high profile corporate working groups, not offered opportunities to lead prestigious projects, left out of some of the key strategic decision making discussions and generally out of the loop but so what!

 

The tactics are not to start with this group but demonstrating strength, determination and the backing of the board by exerting your authority over one of those super stars. If everyone knows you eased out a superstar then they will recognise that resistance is futile and it’s all about negotiating the best exit package. And for those who are prepared to make it smooth and painless there will be attractive offers. After all these are capable, experience,  knowledgable , managers with much to offer in the right organisation. 

 

So how do you ,” persuade”  a popular super star that their future lies else where without giving the impression you were forcing them out. Well you undermine their popularity, you let it be known they are not a team player, that they spend a lot of time away from the organisation enhancing their own reputation but doing little for the organisation, you make great play of any concern they express about your proposals implying that they are not on board with the changes supported by the board, that the changes don’t suit their career plans and that their future loyalty can no longer be assumed.

 

 You say non of this to the individual in fact you cut your self off from them, you make yourself unavailable to them. Naturally they find this very frustrating as previously they were such an influential figure. Their influence is further undermined once others realise that the boss is keeping them out of the loop so they are no-longer some one in the know, some one who knows the thoughts and plans of the key decision makers.

 

The superstar wants to go somewhere where their skills , knowledge and experience will be recognised and valued. The chief executive thanks them for their past service and waves them off. 

 

If all this sounds like dirty tricks rather than best or ethical practice it is but it would be naive to think that it doesn’t go on.

 

Blair Mcpherson former director author and blogger www.blairmcpherson.co.uk