“When deciding whether to hire someone to be a manager, companies should use traditional selection criteria such as intelligence, toughness and determination.” 

Good managers are the cornerstone for successful company, they have the power to influence workforce, clients, the values of the company and how to reinforce them. We all could agree that managers are important and a valuable position, this means that many people, especially ambitious people, want to be managers. Many will work hard on their current job in hope for a spot in managerial team, which is usually the way managers are picked.  

Managers will pick people that they like and are similar to their own personality, even if they don’t mean to. Back in the days managers were chosen by few characteristics which usually were intelligence, toughness, determination and vision. Everyone would like if their boss had these traits but are these enough in the modern managerial culture?  

When companies started to evolve for more economic and social culture managers needed to evolve with it, because managerial style changed with it. People didn’t react well for the old way of strict leading, for they had made work a safe and welcoming place where strong, strict managers where outsiders. This reflected in bad work efficiency because people didn’t want to do their best for “asshole” managers. This phenomenon was spotted by psychologist Daniel Goleman.  

Goleman started to study best characteristics for managers, and he made revolutionary discovery that started to change the way managers are chosen and what type of people where suitable for this position.  

Daniel Goleman noticed after his research that these traditional trades of managers did not reflect to good result in work. He found something in common in many well preforming managers and it was emotional intelligence also called EI. Daniel Coleman noted five different areas of EI which he could measure in finding a good manager.  

The first area was self-awareness, in which he tested person’s understanding of their emotions, strengths, weaknesses and needs. He stated that a self-aware manager knew for example if they didn’t like pressure or didn’t perform well in it. Then they could avoid or anticipate situations where they would be under it. 

 Goleman also noticed that self-aware managers described themselves realistically and knows their limits. Second mark of a good manager in Goleman`s list was self-regulation and It was shown in the person`s ability to adapt to changes. In a changing situation self-regulating person can control their emotions for example stay calm and analyze the situation. It is easier to work with self-regulating person because they are stable and don’t have emotional burst.  

Goleman listed as a third personal ability for a good manager motivation. Motivated managers are energetic, passionate, committed to employer and they have desire to do their best.  

Fourth discovery Coleman did was empathy. Managers with empathy think how decisions affect workers and how to make changes most suitable for all. Empathy was a huge change in managers, because the old characteristics were so opposite. Managers who had empathy could connect better with employees and because of that, motivate them. Empathetic managers are great in team building because of their way to connect with people and the ability to read body language.  

Last but not least in Goleman`s list was social skills which meant that the person was easy to work with. Normally these type people have common sense and are not absolute so you can reason with them. Goleman listed to this category people who knew how to be friendly with purpose. Which you can imagine is very important and useful in management. 

Recruiting the right person can be very difficult especially when talking about managers. Managers reflect their values and work methods on employees, which makes it even more important that a suitable person becomes a manager. Some people are extremely good at talking in interview but lack the strength to do as they have promised, so how could we spot these types of people in recruitment prosses? Should we use the old ways and hire strong and confident personalities who rule by the fist or should we try Colemans way and try to spot people with high EI? 

Let us first recruit people who have the old perks of a manager. The recruitment prosses would start by gathering a pool of people who fit in our standards. We are looking for smart, determent and a strong person, probably a male based on the manly features. We would call the best candidates for an interview with 10-15 persons, where we would have one or two persons evaluating them and make them to solve some problems, that they may face as a manager. We would also ask hard questions and watch how well they can make decisions and stick with them. 

We would notice after the interviews that we have three male candidates who all have army like attitude and are highly work orientated. After this we would make a gut decision, in which we would hire the person who made the best first impression and is the most like us. The result of this recruitment process would’ve been that we have hired a duplicate of ourselves and the company wouldn’t gain any new ideas or progress in a better direction. This loop of self-hiring would continue and get stronger because the new managers would come to environment that all the last managers have shaped to follow their values and work methods.  

Let’s now hire person using Colemans methods of EI. We would start in our job application form in which we would ask questions about persons characteristics and maybe some frustrating assignment to see who is motivated and has the ability to push through irritation. After we have made our pool of 10-15 potential candidates, we would start inviting them for interviews. The interview would be at least three staged spread across few days.  

On the first round of the process, we would assess motivation, because it is easiest to notice and measure. We would give them something to learn in advance and would test it with exam in the interview and give the right answers afterwards. Also, we would make them redo the test after some time. This would be a great way to test many things like motivation, ability to learn, passion and ability to improve. In the next stage we would test self-awareness and self-regulation by asking the candidates what they can and can`t do, their strengths and weaknesses.  

We would also make them do a back-up plan for some situation, and give feedback from it. Last day would be for social skills and empathy, by making them do a group task and talk about it. After all, in this recruitment we would probably have the older people mix with both genres, because they are calm and stable.  These managers would unite and build the workplace community and make the work more enjoyable.  

When recruiting a manager, which method should we use, old or Colemans? In my opinion we should not use purely either. Both ways have big holes in them, in physical people we lose the social and mental side, but in Colemans managers, we lose the innovation and strong-minded book smart people. The third recruitment should have perks from both theories in which we would find people who have a determined state of mind. In this last group, we would see the best results in many categories.  

Now days, managers at least in Finland, need to have EI in high numbers, because of our social norms. Depending on the country, the manager needs different sets of skills to make the position work. In the end, a manager is as good as his ability to lead and develop employees. In Finland, efficient manager has more EI than old perks, and in Shout Korea it is the other way around. Recruiting a manager needs many things to be thought through when wanting to make a right and successful hiring. The key for this is to knowing all these facts, so you have knowledge of the person who you need to find and how to find him.