Karl Edwards presents Working Matters

Tag: job descriptions

  • Loving Monday: Wishing You Were More

    loving_monday

    Have  you ever thought that you should be more than you are? More experienced, more skilled, more relational, more organized, etc.?

    Our hiring practices can lead us to believe that there are ideal people out there somewhere. And we mistakenly conclude that we are not one of them.

    We compare diverse, complex individuals against our idealized preferences as laid out in a depersonalized list of job responsibilities, qualifications, and characteristics.

    (We’ll leave the disasters and complications that such a process creates for the hiring process for another article.)

    For today, though, I want to look at how we inadvertently buy into and compare ourselves with these idealized myths of the omni-competent professional.

    Well of course we always come up short against such an unfair and unrealistic comparison.

    Many of us react by thinking we should be other than we are… more than we are. We think we are lacking in some regard, deficient, or inadequate.

    The result of such thinking is disastrous.

    Once we believe that we are not enough or wish that we were more than we are, we begin behaving accordingly. We sabotage our own well-earned giftedness, (more…)

  • Listen In -> Job Hunting in a Difficult Market #2: What Do I Bring To The Table?

    If one more person asks me what kind of position I’m looking for, I’ll scream. There’s no position on the organizational chart that’s a good fit for me.

    Do you find yourself in a similar predicament? The vocabulary of job descriptions, roles, functions, and career paths isn’t flexible enough for multi-faceted changing, developing people like you and me.

    So what do we bring to the professional table? In this week’s show, Claudia and I discuss how we can describe the unique set of skills, values, working styles, approaches to problem solving, etc. that distinguish us on the job.

    We have a lot to offer, but we need vocabulary and means for communicating that value to prospective employers.

    Listen in.

  • When Everything You’ve Got is the Bare Minimum

    Sometimes we limit our efforts at work to our job description because we don’t want to step on toes or be perceived as presumptuous.

    Many job descriptions are so full that it takes all we’ve got just to complete our daily responsibilities.

    In our podcast conversation on The Literalist, Claudia are discussing the reality that there are occasions when all you’ve got might be the bare minimum.

    The example I want to talk about today is crunch time. Crunch time is when deadlines get moved forward, and all previous planning no longer applies. Crunch time is when there is an unexpected absence on the team, and their workload needs redistributing.

    There are times when more or different is needed of us. If we do not have eyes to notice these needs, then our faithful fulfillment of our job description risks being interpreted as avoiding work, not being a team player, or doing the bare minimum.

    What we need to do is expand our personal definition of “faithful”, “loyal” and “dedicated” service. Instead of limiting it to the strict fulfillment of our written job description, (which is a good thing), we need to include the fulfillment of the greater goals of the department.

    When we view our job description as one piece of many in the achievement of larger department goals, then we open up new perspectives for viewing how we might best adjust during crunch times.

    Instead of being seen as doing the bare minimum, we are the ones who are making things happen, getting things done, and part of the solution.

    It’s not a matter of choosing between being too self-protective or too self-effacing. It’s a matter of being wise about your involvement given the leaders and team with whom you work. These are different for each of us.

    How do you gauge your supervisor’s perception of you?

  • People or Positions?

    Team PlanesWhen you look at someone on your team, do you see a person or their position?

    Are the unique characteristics of each employee the secret treasures that enhance or the troubling booby-traps that derail the effective performance of any given job description?

    Whether you get excited or annoyed when someone doesn’t fill their role as you defined it is an important clue to whether you believe the value comes from who is on the team, or from how you organize the team.

    It is not a simple either/or. Both are obviously significant. But in this age of professional empowerment, I’d err on the side of over-valuing my team members and letting their individual make-ups inform my organizational structure rather than the other way around.

    What do you think?

  • Opportunity to Serve

    Having trouble either keeping volunteers busy or with non-performing volunteers?

    Try using this simple form to create a job description for each opportunity to serve for which you are recruiting volunteers.

    Such a tool would help you and your team define more clearly what you actually needed help with. More importantly, prospective volunteers would see up front how much time was being asked, the duration of the commitment, the tasks involved and the skills required.

    This job description could serve as a talking tool or discussion guide when interviewing interested recruits. You would be able to highlight how the person’s heart fits with the organization’s mission, without sacrificing the substance or quality of the job that needs to get done.

    Download pdf form here.

  • How Did We End Up Here?

    One of my key take-aways from this week’s interview with Rodney Walker is the value of defining roles from the beginning of a work relationship.

    In the case of non-profits, directors recruit a board for a variety of reasons: fund raising potential, public endorsement and reputation, access to their network of connections, among others. Not always considered is what role these board members will play in the on-going operation of the enterprise.

    Here’s the deal. Once you’re hooked on a board member’s value as a fund raiser and/or a connection maker, it’s almost impossible to tell them to back off when you find out that they feel part of their role is to tell you how to lead the organization.

    Better to define at the beginning of the relationship what the role looks like, than find yourselves resenting, resisting or avoiding your own key supporters!

    What have you done to clarify board member roles and responsibilities?