Power, Proximity and the LIMITS OF SELECTION

From the moment a baby is born, it begins to undergo various experiences — some good, some bad. These experiences develop a range of skills within that individual. One such skill is decision-making. Over time, the person learns to understand what is right and what is wrong, what should be done and what should not.

The knowledge base developed over the years is what makes an individual suitable for a job, corporate or otherwise.  Upon entering the corporate world, they are provided with limited resources and responsibilities. They can make decisions only within the smaller jurisdiction defined by their role. 

An entry-level position grants the authority to observe events and pass information to higher authorities in a prescribed format. Here, they may record observations but cannot edit the format itself. Their immediate manager, the section head, presents these observations at a higher level. This manager holds a modest power to interpret events, yet is kept distant from higher authority — essentially, from the head of the section — as there remains much to learn.

As experiences accumulate and knowledge deepens, the individual progresses to the next role. Gradually, as they climb the corporate ladder, they are given subordinates. This journey hones decisive skills, making them eligible to make decisions for a group. This eligibility is awarded with additional power and, hence, authority. Even as responsibilities grow, the individual is often content, because growth increases their proximity to power — a source of personal satisfaction.

Proximity and Power

Once absolute power is attained, they are very close to wielding full authority. The question that arises then is: what will they use that power for? It may be used for self-improvement or for the collective good; to uplift the company or merely to perform a mediocre job for the salary. 

These possibilities make it crucial to select leaders through multiple screenings, ensuring they will behave as the company expects. A leader’s behaviour is reflected in their decisions, which shape the company’s future. Given this risk, companies select a specific type of leader and grant them more or less power according to how well their behaviour aligns with corporate goals. Those who think as the company does are granted greater power; those who do not are kept away from it. This discrimination by proximity is intended to ensure things happen according to plan.

The Fragility of Selection

The most critical question remains: how do you choose the right person for the job? Behavioural interviews, psychometric testing and leadership assessments can offer some insight into how a person might behave when empowered. But do they measure the root causes from which decisive skills were derived? Do they account for the varied experiences an individual has harboured since childhood? The answer is no. These methods allow a candidate to present — and sometimes carefully craft — an image that convinces the jury they are the right fit. Some can fabricate traits to secure the role. This also raises the question of whether it is truly possible to judge someone within such a limited window of time.

What if a candidate presents what the jury wants by sheer luck, shadowing the most capable person? There is no definite answer. The world works on statistics: decisions are made based on the representative sample a person presents in interviews. We can never access the totality of their past actions. The process judges only what someone is likely to become, never what they definitely will become. These uncertainties make selection more crucial, complex and tedious.

The HR manager who can identify the right person for the job must be skilled enough to find a gem in a coal mine — something AI alone cannot achieve while relying solely on well-known personality and competency assessments. Hence, there remains a need for the conscious human practitioner whose job AI cannot replace; if it is forcibly replaced, the result may be chaos — consequences not felt today, but realised much later.