5 Reasons to “Cancel” Looking for Perfection in Your Team

It is interesting how phrases that were once seldom used now take on new meanings in present-day culture. Like “bad optics” which describes something that will not look appropriate to others, or “ghosting” which now describes ending a relationship by suddenly cutting off all forms of communication.

But terms that almost everyone has heard or used recently are “cancel” or “cancel culture” in reference to shunning or punishing someone who does not meet our expectations. Just think about the church, business, and political leaders who would have been canceled many years ago if they were measured against the standards of today. Today, shunning is extremely pervasive. And while there are good outcomes from people raising their expectations of leaders and breaking away from some of the damaging behaviors that were accepted in the past, there are also negative outcomes when shunning becomes excessive. Rather than too quickly canceling someone who is not perfect, perhaps we need to cancel looking for a leader who is free of every blemish. Here are five unintended consequences of searching for the perfect leader.

1. Impossible expectations.

While assisting organizations in defining the profile of a successful candidate for a particular position, we often hear things like “exceptional people skills,” “highly organized,” “exemplary character,” and “visionary,” to name just a few. While all of these competencies are great, how we individually define them and to what level any one person can possess all of them often results in mission impossible.

2. Chronic disappointment.

In The Wizard of Oz, when Dorothy and her three friends finally arrive at the great wizard, they discover he is a farce – nothing but a short, bald man with no power at all! You can almost feel the disappointment touch you through the screen. Our search for perfection only has one destination: disappointment. But this does not stop the cycle from starting all over again with leaders looking for the perfect organization and organizations looking for the perfect leader.

3. Cyclical churning.

When organizations set unrealistic expectations and leaders constantly fail to meet them, it results in churning. Churn refers to the ongoing cycle of search > hire > disappointment > fire > start over. Churn has unintended consequences including wasting excessive amounts of time and money that could have been used towards the organization’s mission, damaging the reputation and brand of the organization, and causing a lack of emotional bonding which is essential for a high-performing team.

4. Short-term commitments.

In years past, employees and companies had something called a psychological contract – a non-binding and often unspoken agreement that implied the company would provide you with long-term employment and you would commit to staying with them for an extended period, which was often a lifetime. This “contract” has been deeply damaged with many organizations having little interest in providing lifetime employment and many employees willing to shop around for the next best offer. While this is not all bad, it does result in short-term commitments, regular churn, and limited emotional investment in relationships.

5. Wasted resources.

This constant cycle of searching, hiring, onboarding, and transitioning requires an enormous amount of time and money. Recruitment and severance packages alone can result in significant waste that could have been used towards more important things such as retaining top talent, coaching, and investing in new technology, products, or services. Here at The Center Consulting Group, we now estimate one transition of a senior-level staff position in a small to mid-size non-profit or business can cost $250,000-$500,000. And this does not take into account the emotional toll it can have on everyone involved.

A note to those leading: Let’s face it. Hiring is a very imperfect art. Sometimes a bad hire is made, and a change must take place. Other times, a staff member is no longer adequate for the present needs of the company. Competent people can and do become less competent. Organizational needs change, and so do the behaviors of employees. But organizations would do well to pause and ask themselves a few questions including, “Are we being realistic in what we want in our leaders?” and “Are we investing in the leaders we have in order to bring out their best?”

A note to those who have been canceled: It would be easy to read this blog and use it as evidence of why the organization that let you go was the problem and needed to be more tolerant or accepting of your limitations. However, this blog is not an excuse for tolerating toxic behaviors, damaging attitudes, or unacceptable incompetence. In other words, there are leaders who need to go. It does not mean they are not valuable in God’s sight, and it does not mean the organization in which they work is not without its own shortcomings. But there are times when a leader’s actions leave no other choice but to be “canceled.”

If your organization is looking to improve its hiring process, contact us to learn more about our hiring assessment tools.

If you are a leader desiring to grow in specific areas, contact us to learn about our leadership coaching services.

Jay Desko is the CEO of The Center Consulting Group and brings experience in the areas of organizational assessment, leadership coaching, decision-making, and strategic questioning. Jay’s degrees include an M.Ed. in Instructional Systems Design from Pennsylvania State University and a Ph.D. in Organizational Behavior and Leadership from The Union Institute.