|
Training your superior
|
HR Executive Moderator
|
Sep 21, 2007 04:56 PDT
|
Sometimes it comes down to poor definition of the job and a poor advert.
If qualifications are not as important as experience, don't make the
former a requirement. However, if qualifications are important then you
can't take on someone without them (in spite of extensive experience).
We don't have enough info here but often the appointed person is the
right candidate for the job even though there are aspects for which he
will require training/mentoring etc. For this you may use external or
internal help but these deficiencies give rise to the perception
(especially among those not chosen) that he was not in fact the best
candidate.
There is no question that the "other guy" is required to obey a
reasonable/lawful order and can be severely disciplined for not doing
so.
But when you want someone to train another you are looking for
enthusiasm rather than mere obedience. The one is useless without the
other. What you need to do (if it's not too late) is sell the concept.
If you had a good and defensible reason for making your decision,
explain it and try to get the "other guy" on board. If applicable
discuss with him what he would need to do in order to be your first
choice next time and what you are willing and able to do to help him.
Good luck,
Ian
-----Original Message-----
Subject: [HR Executive] Training your superior
==============================
HR Executive Discussion Forum
==============================
Hi:
The fact that this other guy has 'extensive experience in the field', as
you say, qualifies him for the job and therefore meets, or even exceeds
the minimum requirements of the job.
I find it a contradiction in terms for you to say he has extensive
experience, and appoint someone without experience, and expect him to
train him.
There doesn't seem to be a good reason why an inexperienced person was
appointed over a very experieced one.
Molefe
----- Original Message -----
| | ==============================
HR Executive Discussion Forum
==============================
Hi!
I need advice in this regard, a senior position was advertised
internally and interviews were conducted where one guy was identified
and appointed out of five interviewed. The person appointed needs
training though qualified enough and unfortunately one of the five
guys interviewed has to assist the appointed guy because he has
extensive experience in the field though not qualified. He refuses on
the basis that he was not appointed but he has to assist the
appointee, what right does this guy has and what powers do we have over
this.
Peter
|
|
|
 |
|
