Emotional intelligence, interpersonal skills, adaptability, and the ability to motivate and inspire others are somehow critical qualities for successful leadership. Additionally, individuals who may initially be perceived as less intelligent may possess valuable strengths and capabilities that contribute to their effectiveness as managers. But is it enough? People have been faking these skills for years and centuries already.
Imagine you have "experienced" (in your company) people working for you as manager for 10, 20, 50 years. Should you promote them to a higher management role? Or similar people as your employees, should they be a managers? I don't think so, here is why;
First I would review the department I am looking for a manager. And plan 5, 10, 25 years ahead. Can they align with my vision at all?
If you don't want to go that far simply, check these items and responses below and decide even before making your decision;
Nepotism or Favoritism: Sometimes, managerial positions are filled based on personal relationships or favoritism rather than merit. Relatives or close associates of company executives may be given managerial roles regardless of their intelligence or qualifications. - Seems intelligent, right? NO. That would kill you in long term if not short. Depends on the field, not in engineering for sure. WE at Silver Design do not appreciate or allow that.
Seniority: In organizations where promotion is based primarily on tenure or seniority rather than merit, individuals who have been with the company for a long time may ascend to managerial positions even if they lack the intelligence or skills required for effective management. Looks right, right? NO. Why? See above + Missed opportunities.
Technical Expertise vs. Leadership Skills: In some fields, individuals are promoted to managerial roles based solely on their technical expertise or experience in a specific area, rather than their leadership abilities or intelligence. This can result in technically proficient individuals being placed in managerial positions for which they may not be well-suited. That might be right, but is it better to bring smo without intelligence? - It depends. If you get the wrong "unintelligent" person, you probably will end up with item 1. You should try communicating this tech people first.
Bias and Discrimination: Unconscious biases or discriminatory practices may play a role in the selection of managers. Factors such as gender, race, age, or socioeconomic background may influence decision-makers' perceptions of intelligence and competence, leading to unfair hiring or promotion practices. - NO! No factors such as gender, rage or age should influence decision-makers' decisions. Intelligence and competence are different subjects to consider for everyone's future and for a greater good.
Lack of Effective Evaluation Criteria: Some organizations may lack clear, objective criteria for assessing managerial candidates, relying instead on subjective judgments or superficial indicators of competence. This can result in less intelligent individuals being chosen for managerial roles due to flawed evaluation processes. - Unfortunately, this would be a serious blockage for company growth as indicated in item 1. No direction no improvement and no gain.
Inadequate Training and Development: In organizations that do not invest in comprehensive training and development programs for managers, individuals may be promoted to managerial positions without the necessary skills or intelligence to succeed in these roles. This can perpetuate a cycle of ineffective leadership and poor decision-making. - Right? Yes. Also, if you try to train an un-intelligent person for the role you would loose another 15 years, with poor decision making. Summary: Choose the right person for the future of your company. Not just the one you know or you like. The one that will (really) knows how to fight and will fight for the company's future. We live in the present, thinking ahead of us...
Comments