Rethinking Work: Define the Actual Job Using the Four Work Types

I just started asking hiring managers to define the actual work before defining the person doing the work.

(Here's a link to the May 8, 2013 webcast on this topic.)

In a recent post I suggested that there are only four jobs in the world:

Thinkers: these are the strategists, creators of new products, those that come up with big ideas and new ways of doing things.

Builders: these are the people who take these ideas and convert them into something tangible.

Improvers: these people improve whatever has been created and built, and make it better.

Producers: these are the people who deliver high quality products and services to the customer.

While all jobs and all people are a mix of all four types, one or two usually dominate. From a hiring and selection standpoint it’s important to get this mix right. None of these work types are better than another, it all depends on the work that needs to be done. Unfortunately, most job descriptions over rely on skills and experience to define the work and filter candidates, with little consideration to this mix. As a recruiter this is a huge selection problem since few top performers are willing to take jobs unless expectations are clarified upfront. To get around this, I just started asking hiring managers to define the actual work before defining the person doing the work.

Based on asking this question for thousands of different jobs over 30 years, it was clear that all types of work could be lumped into these four basic work types. For example, a plant manager might need to focus on ensuring the factory worked smoothly 24/7, which is a Producer role. In addition, the job might also require that the painting line be upgraded to meet OSHA requirements, which is an Improver role. A manufacturing engineer in the same plant working for the plant manager, might need to develop a long range manufacturing plan using state-of-the-art robotics. This is the Thinker work type, especially if the person also has to figure out how to seamlessly introduce the new line without affecting current production levels. Implementing the new production line under these conditions is the Builder work type.

The model works extremely well when you define the job first and then break it into the four work types. It’s less meaningful when you use it to broadly classify a person. In this case, it only implies interests and preferences, not competencies. For example just because someone is an Improver, doesn’t mean they’re good at it, and even if they are good at it, it’s only in their niche.

To figure out the components of the real job by the four work types, I ask the hiring manager to define areas that need to upgraded or improved (Improver), the types of big problems that need to be solved (Thinker), if there are any big projects or changes that need to be implemented (Builder), and what aspects of the job require high-quality repeatable activities (Producer).

This list of objectives is then put in priority order. This is what I refer to as a performance-based job description. One or two of the work types are typically at the top of the list. Assessing competency and motivation to do this work is the next step in the process. I use the Most Important Interview Question of All Time to figure this part out. The key to this is to have the candidate describe an accomplishment that best compares to what needs to be done on the job. For example, for the manufacturing engineer spot above, I’d ask the candidate to describe an accomplishment related to putting together a long range manufacturing plan. I describe this whole process in The Essential Guide for Hiring & Getting Hired, but the idea is to obtain a comparable accomplishment for each of the performance objectives listed in the performance-based job description.

While the four work types are useful for defining the work required in any job, on a broader scale the concept can also be used to better understand how companies and people grow, develop and interact. Interestingly, people grow by first becoming technically proficient at something – the Producer role – then evolve into one or more of the other work types. This is an inside-out progression. Companies on the other hand, grow outside-in, starting with an idea, building it, improving it, and then producing it in a repeatable manner. Unfortunately as companies get bigger and bigger, change becomes more and more difficult. This is what Clayton Christensen calls the “Innovator’s Dilemma.” This type of stagnation can be minimized by looking at every job as a mix of all four work types, balancing the needs of the company with the people currently on the team, and the capability of the new hire. In my opinion, using the work type model to achieve this balance is where it has the most value. This alone will open up the talent pool to a whole new group of Thinkers, Builders, Improvers and Producers, never before considered.

______________________________________________________

Lou Adler (@LouA) is the Amazon best-selling author of Hire With Your Head (Wiley, 2007) and the award-winning Nightingale-Conant audio program, Talent Rules! His latest book, The Essential Guide for Hiring & Getting Hired, is now available on Amazon. You might want to join Lou's new LinkedIn group to discuss this and related hiring issues.