“We want to hire the best,”  a talent manager said to me.

I asked, “How do you define the ‘best’?”

“We look for candidates who have the education, skills and talents required for the job.”

“Do you discuss your company mission and core with candidates?”

“I don’t think we do.”

Well-known author and consultant, Simon Sinek, says “If you hire people who can do the job, they will work for you for money.  But if you hire people who believe what you believe, they will work for you with blood and sweat and tears.”

How can you determine if a candidate believes what you believe?  Traditional selection tools—resumes, interviews, reference checks—do not clearly identify candidates’ beliefs.

Try this.  Spend more time with candidates.  Take them to dinner. Get to know them.  Talk about common interests. Ask your high performers to spend time with candidates.  What do candidates know about your company’s purpose and core values?

If hired, use the probationary period (typically three to six months) to learn more about the new hire. If a new hire’s actions are not consistent with what you believe, it is better to acknowledge the misfit and let the person go.

Two contributors informally compared their leaders during a coffee break.

“My manager is very smart, ambitious and confident.  He has achieved a lot and has a grand vision for our company.  But he is hard to work for.  He does not listen and thinks he must prevail on every issue.  He comes to every meeting with a strong point of view and quickly criticizes opposing views. If one of his suggestions goes South during implementation, he is quick to blame others.”

“My boss is hard to work for also but for different reasons.  He lacks confidence, seldom proposes suggestions and defers to the most verbal members of our team.  We spend a lot of time passionately debating differing views.  Most meetings end without a clear path forward.  And we are slow to take advantage of opportunities.”

These two descriptions represent leaders with differing egos—individuals’ sense of self-worth.  The first leader appears conceited with an exaggerated ego.  The second leader is modest, humble, and perhaps insecure.

Effective leaders balance confidence and humbleness.  They are true to themselves and value input.  Healthy egos proudly recognize others’ successes and confidently make “tough calls” when facing risky alternatives.