Latest / Hiring & Firing with Fexingo: Recruitment, Performance, and Workforce Decisions / Why Hiring for Grit Backfires on Your Team
Transcript
- Lucas: So a few years back, every recruiter I knew was obsessed with 'grit.' Angela Duckworth's TED Talk had gone viral, her book was on every CEO's shelf, and suddenly we were all supposed to hire people who never quit. Luna: Right, it became this shortcut for 'good hire.' If a candidate could tell a story about overcoming obstacles, they were practically in. Lucas: Exactly. And I think the intention was fine — nobody wants a quitter. But the problem is, grit is a trait, not a skill. And when you hire purely for grit, you can actually damage your team's ability to collaborate. Luna: That's a strong claim. How do you measure that? Lucas: Well, there's a 2024 study from researchers at three Fortune 500 companies — they tracked 2,000 managers over two years. They found that employees rated high in grit on a pre-hire assessment had 18 percent lower turnover in the first year. So retention looks great. But their team's overall performance — measured by peer collaboration scores and project completion rates — actually fell by 14 percent compared to teams without a grit-focused hire. Luna: Fourteen percent drop in collaboration. That's huge. So grit helps the individual stay, but it hurts the group. Lucas: Bingo. And I saw this play out at a mid-market SaaS company a few years ago. They hired a sales rep who was famously gritty — he'd cold-call 200 people a day, never took no for an answer. His individual numbers were solid. But within six months, three of his teammates had requested transfers. They said he steamrolled meetings, refused to pivot when a prospect asked for different information, and generally treated collaboration as a waste of time. Luna: So he was persistent, but not adaptive. That's the distinction, right? Lucas: Exactly. Duckworth herself, in her later writing, started talking about 'passion and perseverance for long-term goals.' But the way it got operationalized in hiring was just 'do you give up easily?' The nuance — knowing when to change course — got lost. Luna: So what's the alternative? Are we saying companies should stop asking about challenges? Lucas: Not at all. But I think you need to pair the grit question with a context-switching question. Ask: 'Tell me about a time your usual approach wasn't working and you had to try something completely different.' That's adaptive persistence. Luna: So you're looking for someone who can push hard but also knows when to pull back. That's a harder thing to assess in an interview. Lucas: It is, but it's worth it. There's a good example from a tech company I talked to — they used to ask 'What's the hardest challenge you've overcome?' and now they ask 'What's a goal you pursued that you later decided to abandon, and why?' Luna: Ooh, that's a great question. It tests for reflection, not just endurance. Lucas: Right. Because in most knowledge work, the ability to pivot is more valuable than the ability to grind. A developer who bangs their head against a bug for three weeks without asking for help — that's grit, but it's also a disaster. Luna: And a salesperson who keeps pitching the same script to a client who's giving clear signals to stop — that's not resilience, that's poor listening. Lucas: Exactly. So the research suggests that grit alone predicts tenure, but not performance. And in collaborative environments, too much grit can actually reduce team output. I think the lesson is: don't stop asking about persistence, but add a layer that tests for flexibility. Luna: It reminds me of the old 'hire for attitude, train for skill' — except now we're saying 'hire for adaptability, not just grit.' Lucas: I think that's a fair summary. And look, this is the kind of conversation we try to have on this show every week — digging into the assumptions behind common hiring practices. If you find these episodes useful, I'll be honest: a small group of listeners keeps this show going through buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. No pressure, but that support is what lets us keep making episodes without ads. Luna: Yeah, it's a good reminder. I've been on the other side — I listen to podcasts too, and I know how easy it is to just consume without thinking about what it takes to produce. So if you're finding value, it's worth checking out. Lucas: Alright, back to the research. One thing I found really interesting: the same study that showed the collaboration drop also identified a subset of employees they called 'adaptive persisters' — people who scored high on grit but also high on a measure of cognitive flexibility. Those individuals actually boosted team performance by 6 percent. Luna: So the magic is in the combination. Grit plus flexibility equals better outcomes. Grit alone equals problems. Lucas: Exactly. And the good news is, you can assess for that in an interview. You don't need a complex test. Just listen for whether the candidate can talk about a time they changed their mind, abandoned a plan, or took advice that contradicted their gut. Luna: And if they can't think of an example, that's a red flag. Lucas: Huge red flag. Because everyone has a story like that — whether it's in work or in life. If they can't surface one, they might be too rigid to admit they've ever been wrong. Luna: Or they're so gritty they refuse to acknowledge a pivot happened. Lucas: Right. So I'd say, next time you're interviewing, don't just ask about the mountain they climbed. Ask about the mountain they decided not to climb, and why. That's where the real insight lives. Luna: Good advice. And a lot more actionable than just chasing the grit narrative. Lucas: Absolutely. That's our takeaway for today. Thanks for listening.