The Myth of the Bell Curve: Look for Hyper The Hyper-Performers

"Think about how people perform in creative, service, and intellectual property businesses (where all businesses are going). There are superstars in every group. Some software engineers are 10X more productive than the average; some sales people deliver 2-3X their peers; certain athletes far outperform their peers; musicians, artists, and even leaders are the same.

These "hyper performers" are people you want to attract, retain, and empower. These are the people who start companies, develop new products, create amazing advertising copy, write award winning books and articles, or set an example for your sales force. They are often gifted in a certain way (often a combination of skill, passion, drive, and energy) and they actually do drive orders of magnitude more value than many of their peers.

If we're lucky we can attract a lot of these people - and when we do we should pay them very well, give them freedom to perform and help others, and take advantage of the work they do. Investment banks understand this - that's why certain people earn 10-fold more than others."

"People often believe the bell curve is "fair." There are an equal number of people above and below the average. And fairness is very important. But fairness does not mean "equality" or "equivalent rewards for all." High performing companies have very wide variations in compensation, reflecting the fact that some people really do drive far more value than others. In a true meritocracy this is a good thing, as long as everyone has an opportunity to improve, information is transparent, and management is open and provides feedback."

Bersin, Josh. (2014). The Myth of the Bell Curve: Look for Hyper The Hyper-Performers. Retrieved on January 19, 2017 from http://www.forbes.com/sites/joshbersin/2014/02/19/the-myth-of-the-bell-curve-look-for-the-hyper-performers/#2e6acad613fc 

The Case for Expert Leaders

"[O]rganizations perform more effectively when led by individuals who have a deep understanding of the core business of their organization. Being a capable general manager is not sufficient. Expert leaders are those with (1) inherent knowledge, acquired through technical expertise combined with high ability in the core business activity; (2) industry experience, which stems from time and practice within the core business industry; and (3) leadership capabilities, which include management skills and a leader’s innate characteristics."

"[T]o lead creative individuals requires both ‘technical and creative problem-solving skills’ since . . . ‘they provide a basis for structuring an inherently ill-defined task and because they provide the credibility needed to exercise influence’."

"[F]irst, that the evaluation of creative people and their ideas can only be done by individuals who share their competencies; in short, it takes one to know one (or competently assess one). Second, leaders who share the same creative and technical perspective and motivation as their followers can communicate more clearly; finally, in relation to performance, they can better articulate the needs and goals of the organization."

Godall, Amanda H. (2012). A Theory of Expert Leadership. Retrieved on January 9, 2017 from http://ftp.iza.org/dp6566.pdf

Why Not Include IQ Tests in Our Hiring Process?

"No method of hiring is perfect, or even close to perfect, at picking the best workers—for instance, the relationship between IQ scores and eventual worker performance is modest to strong at best. But IQ tests are as good as anything that exists in the real world. And here’s one useful finding: you’re much better off forming your opinion of a worker based on her IQ score than basing it on a check of her references or (worst of all) a handwriting analysis.

In addition, it appears that IQ tests are even better at predicting outcomes when the job requires higher skills. Back in the 1960s, the Bell Telephone System gave its entry-level management trainees an IQ-type test along with a number of personality tests. Bell’s human resources division kept the test results a secret for two decades, even from other employees in the firm. When, after two decades, the company looked back to see which tests did the best job of predicting which trainees eventually rose the highest in the company hierarchy, the IQ-type test did the best job, beating out the personality tests. Looking across many studies of IQ in the elite workforce, one review says,

[G]eneral cognitive ability is the best single predictor of executive/professional-level performance, just as it is of performance in the middle to high-end range of the general workforce."

"In most of these studies that look at the relationship between IQ and worker quality, the quality measure is subjective: you ask the worker’s boss how well the worker did, and compare that judgment against the worker’s IQ score. Some studies can look at somewhat more objective measures, such as sales per year for a salesperson, or successful sorties for a military pilot. The more objective the measure, the stronger the relationship usually is between IQ and the measure of worker quality."

Jones, Garret. (2015). Just a Test Score?. Hive Mind: How Your Nation's IQ Matters So Much More Than Your Own. Retrieved on January 2, 2017 from http://www.sup.org/books/extra/?id=23082&i=Chapter%201.html