Talent to Task: Building a Team Around What People Do Best
Most organizations hire the person to fit
the job. There is a fixed slot, a rigid list of duties, and the search is for
someone who can be poured into it. Kim E. Dooley tried the opposite, and in her
memoir When Life Misses a Note: Gaining Wisdom Through Lived Experience,
she makes the case that it is the better way to build a team.
When she was appointed an associate dean,
she inherited something she had never managed before: staff. As a professor,
she had always chosen collaborators whose skills complemented her own. Now she
had a group of people already in place, and, as she puts it plainly, the team
did not necessarily have all the skills it needed to run well. The obvious move
was to push everyone to work harder in their assigned lanes. She did something
stranger instead.
Start
with strengths, not slots
Dooley asked every member of her staff to
write down two things: their strengths and the tasks they actually enjoyed
doing. Then she laid those lists next to the official position descriptions. In
a series of informal retreats she called four o'clock meetings, the team sorted
out the mismatches, the work one person dreaded that another would happily
take, the talent going unused because it did not appear in a job description.
Out of that came a reorganization she named talent to task, and a set of new roles
built around the people who actually held them.
It worked. And where real gaps remained,
places where no one on the team had the needed skill, she treated that as
useful information rather than failure. A little turnover and a few new hires
with the right competencies filled the holes. Strengths first, then a
clear-eyed gap analysis. Together, she writes, they created a team that
performed.
The
evidence in the data
Years later, the office took the Gallup
CliftonStrengths assessment, and the results startled her. Every member of her
professional staff landed in a different domain: one strong in executing, one
in influencing, one in relationship-building, one in strategic thinking. The
assessment noted that a team covering all four tends to be a high-performing
one. She had assembled exactly that, mostly by instinct and attention. What are
the odds, she wondered. The honest answer is that they were not odds at all. They
were the natural result of building around strengths instead of slots.
Being
seen is part of the work
There is a human layer beneath the
management theory, and it is the part Dooley clearly cares about most. She had
once been on the receiving end of this kind of leadership, a colleague who
recognized what she was good at and made her feel she truly belonged on the
team. She never forgot how much that mattered. So she made a point of doing it
for her own people. She learned to delegate and calls it the best thing she
ever learned. She asked each person for a single word to guide their year and
gave them framed reminders of that word alongside their strengths, so they
would see, every day, exactly what they brought.
That is the quiet argument of talent to
task. Efficiency is the smaller half of it. The larger half is that people do
their best work when they are known, when someone has bothered to notice what
they are good at and has built a place for precisely that. Put the right
strengths where they are needed, tell people plainly that you see them, and a
group of individuals becomes a team.
When Life Misses a Note: Gaining Wisdom
Through Lived Experience by Kim E. Dooley is available now on Amazon, for
anyone who leads a team and wants to build it around what people do best.
%20Final%20(1).jpg)
Comments
Post a Comment