Article written by Katsuhiro Nakamura (Jack)
As a consultant, I often come across to concerns of how to accurately estimate someone’s potential in our daily routines. “One Thai manager is not performing well and this is not a good influence for our company. Should we fire him or should we train him?” This is a typical concern I often hear.
Let me approach this from a controversial statement. One day, a former track and field athlete Tamesue caused some argument about “effort.” He said “It is a myth that whoever make effort can be successful. For example, 99% of the reason athletes can win an Olympic game is because of their DNA. Talent and environment decide everything.” As you can imagine, this provoked argument on the Internet. “That is too outspoken,” “He is a failure as a coach because he does not embrace effort,” and etc. On the other hand, there are some people who supports his opinion. What do you think?
Actually, this does not hold ad an argument because there are two different perspective. One is called descriptive theory, a theory that analyze the actual condition scientifically, and another is called normative theory, a theory to consider how things actually should be. The statement of “DNA is an important factor that influences athletes’ success at Olympic Games” is a fact. On the other hand, the belief of “effort improves people” is also undeniable. Both of these are different ways of looking at success (one analyze the current condition and another seeks for how it actually should be), and they are both correct.
One is called “descriptive theory,” a theory that analyze the actual condition scientifically, and another is called “normative theory,” a theory to consider how things actually should be. The statement of “DNA is an important factor that influences athletes’ success at Olympic Games” is a fact. On the other hand, the belief of “effort improves people” is also undeniable. Both of these are different ways of looking at success (one analyze the current condition and another seeks for how it actually should be), and they are both correct.
You may wonder why I talk about this. These two different ways of thinking often contradicts with one another when it comes to human capital development. “Every man develops” is a great way of thinking. However, in terms of business, it is a little too naïve to depend on this theory. Some people never change. It is critical for operating business to give the cold shoulders for those who do not improve their performance. Think about this. When your business goal is to grow 150%, we have to consider if everyone really grow 150%. A firm must replace performing employees with better ones. Those who perform lower than other employees should be replaced by others.
Normally, higher position people need “descriptive theory” way of view and skills to judge their employees based on it. On the other hand, managers are responsible to watch over everyone and help them grow. Working globally, managers are often get caught in dilemma of these two ways of looking at people because they are required to take both of these roles. However, this can be a good training of operating business. Human capital management inherits dilemmas, and requires integration of these two perspectives. To become a better leader, you need to watch your human capital and your organization with warm heart and business-like heart. Working in foreign countries is the best opportunity to practice this.
