Two of the most important actions leaders take in a business are hiring and terminating employees. The talent a leader brings into their organization is either the lifeblood or the poison. This critically important aspect of growing a business becomes even more challenging when the talent pool in the marketplace is tight. Leaders at the hiring level may tend to adjust the standards they use to evaluate and hire talent in such a market. This isn’t done with any intent to shift performance expectations, but without checks, it can lead to investing more time in managing employees rather than helping them develop and contribute.
In the ideal organizational environment, the business has defined standards of contribution/performance based on specific role definitions. This is why a given role in the organization exists – to contribute to an end result/outcome. When hiring standards are bent to accommodate role contributions, leadership must understand that they are taking ownership of the investment cost to manage resources. The more leadership is drawn into managing, the less productive the entire system becomes.
Now let’s insert some reality…
If this was so easy, every business would flourish. Employees would be so happy and glad to show up at work that you would not be able to control the exuberance. This is not the case, or in some cases, nowhere near the talent trends in the marketplace. Thus, leadership needs to be conscious of what level the role definition is being consciously adjusted to when a new hire is brought into the role and might require a greater level of management.
The hire may not be a poor hire. It will just need a different level of attention than possibly prior resources in that role. Sometimes this is brushed off as the person being new to the role, and even the organization, its culture, and its standards. Again, this adjustment just redefined the role’s contribution level and what leadership is willing to pay for in lost contribution over time.
In these insights, the concept of “Role Definition” might be unfamiliar. Many organizations use the term “Job Description” to describe how a particular resource works within the organization’s system. Too frequently, they focus on what the person does rather than how their actions deliver specific contributions to the system. The role is unnecessary if it doesn’t contribute to the organization. When a leader lets standards shift in a role, and the contribution requires added managerial cost, the soft cost loss is quietly taken out of profitability. At first, it isn’t seen, but if this happens in multiple places in the contribution system, it starts to show up, and the now-accepted standard has already been lowered. Strangely enough, the role definition has never been updated to reflect the lowered standard of contribution and the added cost for managing the resources. (You may want to refer to the prior week’s insights on accountability not being toxic)
This week, as you review your organization’s opportunities for improvement, consider your role definitions and whether they have been compromised and costing you more money, lowering your profitability.
Consider engaging a Promise Guide to walk with you along the path to greater net profits. Call JKL Associates at FL (407) 984-7246 or MI (313) 527-7945.
Journey On!
COPYRIGHT – JKL ASSOCIATES 2026
QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS – EMAIL US AT PARTNERS@JKLASSOCIATES.COM OR CALL OUR OFFICES – MI AT (313) 527-7945 FL AT (407) 984-7246
Celebrating 30 years of Delivering on “Promises”
