Click The Icons For More!

My favorite athletes to coach were the ones who played multiple sports. It was like a puzzle to see how the skills and techniques from other sports aligned with what I was trying to teach. Where I believe I differed in my philosophy was in the focus on adaptation. Those skills that were viewed as quirks when trying to transfer them to the sport in the moment were often “coached out” of players to make them fit the needs of that particular game.

It takes a lot of time to retrain something. Often, retraining means breaking an old habit and building a new one. If an athlete plays multiple sports, by the time you get them back up to a baseline, the season is likely over, and they are going to play another sport where everything you just spent time doing will likely be undone.

An abstract skillset is valuable because it’s different. In sports, different is an advantage because if your opponent has never seen it before, they will have to figure out how to adjust. In the world of business, that abstract skillset likely comes from outside your organization, presenting a great opportunity to learn something that could be beneficial going forward.

I want to focus on hobbies. What people do or like to do should be considered a skill used to evaluate their viability as an employee. Think about why. We have spent a decent amount of time doing other things our whole lives. What has an individual dedicated their time to? Do they like to cook? Do they play video games? Do they build LEGO sets? Besides getting to know someone in a screening, this offers valuable information about their ability to learn, communicate, and ultimately produce.

Let’s look at the examples listed above. Someone who enjoys cooking is likely creative, able to think quickly, and follows instructions well. Do you work in an environment where those might be requirements? Is that something missing on your team? How can you peel that back further? Ask them what they like to cook and have them outline how to make one of their favorite recipes. Little things that seem like they don’t matter can really tell the story of an individual.

How about the gamer? Boomers, Gen X, and older Millennials may not have the same attachment to video games as some and dismiss it as wasting time in front of a screen. Think about the vast array of video games — the different consoles, button strokes, and types of games. As a gamer myself, there is a huge difference between playing Call of Duty and Mortal Kombat. What kinds of games do they play? If you have this knowledge in advance, how can you peel the layers back to see how they fit? That gamer likely has a good ability to learn and retain information because of the diversity of control maps. They are also likely competitive and driven by advancement. For those technical roles that require being behind a screen and focus, you may have a good fit.

What about LEGO sets? Intricate models that require time, patience, high levels of focus, and attention to detail. What does it say if they can do this repetitively? What kind of workload could they handle? They can likely self-regulate, work at a pace, set goals for completion, and swiftly move between projects. Is your role project-based? Does someone who works this way fit exactly what you need to really move your team forward?

These are all generalities — the examples and how they fit — but the point is to think and expand beyond what we traditionally consider a quality fit when it comes to hiring. The outdated metrics of simply measuring experience and education are just one piece that factors into an evaluation.

When it comes to building a team, who you hire matters. It sounds obvious, but we get blinded by the shiny objects we see without fully knowing if that shine is just on the surface or if it shines through to the core. Finding people is easy and evaluating them is hard, but if you have done your evaluations right, the decision will make itself when it comes time to do so.