WDYT Is Mindset key to getting jobs?

[Opti]

WDYT - What do you think, is one's mindset key to getting jobs?
Found this article on Yahoo and will check if the libary has his book.


Conventional wisdom says employers are looking for employees who have the perfect skill set for the job at hand. However, new research conducted with the help of the world's top employers and scholars overwhelmingly suggests otherwise.

In the new book, Put Your Mindset to Work: The One Asset You Really Need to Win and Keep the Job You Love, Harvard lecturer and PhD Paul Stoltz and co-author James Reed reveal that employers are most interested in candidates who have a certain mindset — regardless of skill set.

Actually, a resounding 96 percent of employers say they would prefer to "hire, promote, pay and retain" people with a particular mindset over a desired skill set. And 98 percent of employers thought it more likely that a person with the right mindset could easily develop the right skill set if they had to, rather than the other way around.

Stoltz sat down with The Daily Ticker's Aaron Task to "define and quantify" what mindset means to employers. He calls his findings the "3G Mindset". It consists of the top three qualities that employers consider most important: global, good and grit.


As Paul explains to Aaron, here's what each "G" means :

Global: This is the big picture perspective. It is your ability to lift your eyes out of the weeds, look at the world and understand the ripple effect of your actions.

Good: This is the sensitivity to people and awareness of and the inkling to do good for others around you.

Grit: This is the intestinal fortitude, that uncommon tenacity, intensity, resilience in everything that you do.

Not only do nearly all employers want to hire people with a winning 3G mindset, they would trade 7.2 "normal" employees for just one person with the perfect winning mindset, says Stoltz.

So how do you demonstrate that you have these to employers?

Simply take one of these 3Gs and put into action in a way that creates a compelling result, whether it is in a cover letter, resume or during the interview. Here are two examples Stoltz gives:

•Example (good and grit): I fought through several layers of bureaucracy for two years to get a new wellness program implemented in our company.
•Example (good and global): I volunteered to mentor new hires before and after work hours and cut first-90-day turnover by 72 percent.

[servant_of_dog]

Jun 4, 2011 12:05:38 GMT -5 Opti said:

In the new book, Put Your Mindset to Work: The One Asset You Really Need to Win and Keep the Job You Love, Harvard lecturer and PhD Paul Stoltz and co-author James Reed reveal that employers are most interested in candidates who have a certain mindset — regardless of skill set.

Actually, a resounding 96 percent of employers say they would prefer to "hire, promote, pay and retain" people with a particular mindset over a desired skill set. And 98 percent of employers thought it more likely that a person with the right mindset could easily develop the right skill set if they had to, rather than the other way around.

Stoltz sat down with The Daily Ticker's Aaron Task to "define and quantify" what mindset means to employers. He calls his findings the "3G Mindset". It consists of the top three qualities that employers consider most important: global, good and grit.

Yes. I don't have the desired/required educational background for the jobs I apply for, but I have experience, so I focus on my experience and my mindset when interviewing. I haven't read the book, but it sounds like the strategy that has worked well for me as both an employee and an interviewee. I've voluntarily resigned positions twice in the past three years (once due to relocation in 2008, once due to dissatisfaction, earlier this year), and the longest I've been unemployed is two months. I've increased my rate of compensation by just over 35% in those two moves, so I'm moving in the right direction...
In the second interview for my current position, the CFO flatly stated that she was looking for someone with an accounting degree, but proceeded to offer the position because I would be a good fit for the company. I think I've been very fortunate, but also know, and can convey when interviewing, that I will be an asset to the company.

[phil5185]

Not only do nearly all employers want to hire people with a winning 3G mindset, they would trade 7.2 "normal" employees for just one person with the perfect winning mindset, says Stoltz.

That's been the case forever - Pareto's (1848 - 1923) observation was that 20% of the people do 80% of the work. So an employer continually seeks workers from that 20% group. But, in truth, you need 100% of the workers to get 100% of the work done.

The 3Gs is more important now than 30 yrs ago. Current employees have been programed that corporations are evil, college profs are openly socialist, the media is anti-business, some K-12 are on-board as corporation bashers. (Did you see where middle schoolers listed bush & cheany among the 5 most evil men? Teachers overstepping?)
At any rate, it is tough for young workers who have been taught to hate corporations on several levels to suddenly start faking it and do their best for their company. Wasn't a problem 30 or 40 yrs ago.

[kgb18]

At any rate, it is tough for young workers who have been taught to hate corporations on several levels to suddenly start faking it and do their best for their company.

I don't know what you consider a "young" worker, but this is just my observation from the work world so far. I was never taught to hate corporations. I did learn quickly that often times you can do your best and help the company, but the company doesn't necessarily reward you for that work. And companies have no more loyalty to employees these days than employees have loyalty to companies. It goes both ways.

[raeoflyte]

I very strongly dislike working in corporate america, but I see it as a means to an ends, so I work my butt off for it.

I think my work ethic is more just selfishness. I like having lots of money, for the things, experiences, and security that it provides. I also don't want to do anything for 40+ hours a week badly. If I'm stuck here for that long, I at least want to know that I accomplished something at the end of the day.

I know that I thrive in large family driven corporations. The comfort of a big/national company, with the compassion to still see people and not just #'s. The mega corps that I have worked for were soul sucking, lifeless machines, that went bankrupt in the end anyway.

[phil5185]

The mega corps that I have worked for were soul sucking, lifeless machines, that went bankrupt in the end anyway.

The 1970s b-school influence tells people that a huge corporation is a soul sucking machine with only profit as a motive. And that instills the cynicism that exists with both young managers & young workers.

At an earlier time, both mgmt & labor understood that the purpose of a corporation was to earn a profit. Mgmt understood that respect, good conditions, good equipment, good hours, good benefits, good pay, were the things that motivated employees to do their best to earn a profit for their company. When I was in college in the 1960s that was the message - a corporation was a group of people, mgrs & labor, working together to earn a profit. "Profit' was not evil, it was what all employees worked to advance.

And that is what disappeared in the 1970 & 80s with the anti-business influence of the liberal business schools.

[kgb18]

Profit isn't evil, but you don't need someone to "influence" you to realize that a company cares about the company and not you when you work for years, do a good job, get great performance reviews, but get no raise, no extra vacation, no thanks when you go above and beyond. Profit feels evil when you help make it, but don't see any of it.

[formerexpat]

I don't know what you consider a "young" worker, but this is just my observation from the work world so far. I was never taught to hate corporations. I did learn quickly that often times you can do your best and help the company, but the company doesn't necessarily reward you for that work. And companies have no more loyalty to employees these days than employees have loyalty to companies. It goes both ways.

Sounds like you were taught instant gratification and expecting to be doted upon for every little thing that you do, most of which is expected in a job.

My observation has been quite the opposite. The young, hard working people I've worked with are the ones moving up. Didn't happen over night but they're certainly the ones being taken well care of now that they've proven themselves to be consistent top performers.

But I've also seen the people that do hard work for a year here, a year there, expecting over night money or instant promotions. Sorry, the world doesn't work that way. Have to be able to prove yourself year in and year out and show that you're not a one hit wonder...or even worse, a person that becomes disinterested quickly when things don't go your way [here is where you picture a 2 year old throwing a tantrum].

[kgb18]

I don't think I was expecting instant gratification at all. I was at my first job for six years full-time, and I had worked there for three years part-time before that. I didn't expect over night money at all, but it would have been nice to at least make enough where I didn't qualify for food stamps.

I'm still in my field. I have never "thrown a tantrum." But I feel like after nine years with a company if you're still basically where you started, despite being given excellent performance reviews year after year, that's not a company that really appreciates what you do. Awhile after I left, I popped back into the office for a visit and my direct boss (responsible for the work side of things, but not the money side) said she missed me and wished I had never left.