I am one of those people who like to divide the world into two groups. One analogy I find helpful (which I attribute to Sun Tzu in the Art of War) is the rock vs log designation. What does that mean?

Here’s how it goes….some people are rocks, some people are logs. Logs are great when you need to move quickly: say. move troops from location to another. What’s valued is the ability to be agile, handle undefined circumstances, or constantly changing situations. Change agents are often logs. Equally important are the rocks. Those are the people who can hold a position (protect a location, keep the enemy from invading). What’s valued there is the ability to hold steadfast in spite of situations, clarity on a process, everyone knows what they need to do.  People who own processes which need to be clear: compliance, audit: these are folks who need to be rocks.

Often times, people struggle when they are put in roles which are opposite of who they naturally are. I’ve met logs, I’ve met rocks…you need both. But when you have a rock where you need a log, or visa versa, it’s usually disastrous, and unfortunately it gets attributed to the person rather than the role.

So next time you fill a role, or are choosing a role yourself, ask yourself: for this to be successful, which is it?  Am I putting the right person in?