Once upon a time, an intelligent pope decided to commission a young sculptor to paint a series of frescoes for the ceiling of a chapel that was under reconstruction. The sculptor refused.
He wasn’t a painter, he would have to travel a distance to complete the job, he was already working on beautifying a massive papal tomb. The pope insisted that this rather inexperienced sculptor work on the chapel ceiling, and back then (as now), it wasn’t encouraged to argue with the number one religious figure of the Western world.
But everyone around them is sure to have wondered why the pope wanted him so particularly, even the sculptor. Today, the 5 million people who visit the Sistine Chapel annually, many of them to admire the ceiling alone, no longer question Pope Julius II’s stubbornness about hiring the 33-year-old Michelangelo.
From the Sistine to Amazon: The “who” behind two formative moments in civilisation
The Sistine Ceiling frescoes – one of the greatest achievements of art – tell a quiet tale about the absolute necessity to get the right person for the job, not whoever’s near or available. It also tells us something else: you shouldn’t look to the forest for the trees all the time. The right tree may be in a land far away, or in your backyard. And above all, we need to have open minds. Tempted as it is to segue from this late 15th-century vignette into discussing how technology has made ‘finding the right person’ a relatively simpler process, the story is still appealing because so many of our attitudes are amusingly unchanged. In spite of the resources available to us, we revert to ideas, processes, and people that ‘seem’ familiar.
Fast forward 500 years later. The way we understand global trade was transformed in 1994 by a platform called Amazon, which would soon sell products across national borders. This pointed to an economic integration of the whole world, and was fertile ground for a resurgence in cross-cultural exchanges. Everyone had a moment getting to know and appreciate products built by people in unknown places, to the extent that Korean wellness products and Lebanese/Ethiopian delicacies became household words in the U.S. and Europe.
In 2011, a group of rural women in Thiruvananthapuram founded a handloom, spices, and organic food brand called Looms & Weaves. In 2020, Carol Anne Hilton, an Anishinaabe lady in Canada, founded the inspirational Cheekbone Beauty, the very first Indigenous-owned cosmetics company, with products that spoke to her heritage. Both companies found remarkable international acclaim and success. Perhaps for the first time ever, customers found everyday problems being solved by the knowledge and skill of people who they had no idea even existed.
Both the 16th century religious leader and the 21st century world market found unexpected help from unexpected quarters. And the risks involved in both scenarios were great. Currency differences, the difficulty of customer service in countries that spoke different languages, and the problems of payment fraud plagued e-commerce. The pope would have owed Michelangelo 3000 ducats (US$ 600,000) whether he liked his work or not. What trumped these potential risks is the value created by having the ‘right’ person in place. Whether the end is majestic artwork or organic kitchen products, familiarity is no measure of competence. On the contrary, unfamiliarity is crucial to learning and evolution. Businesses and individuals are used to hiring people who reside near them or belong to the same country or share their political/religious views, and this hankering after comfort comes at prices organizations cannot afford.
As the world becomes more kaleidoscopic, we have the chance to come in touch with products, services, ideas, and people we feel truly connected to. Ignoring our choices places the future of industries completely in the hands of social beliefs/forces beyond anyone’s control.
Why ask “Who?”
– As the first little anecdote shows us, working with the ‘right’ person wasn’t meaninglessly set aside to focus on whoever was available in the same district. The correct fit was an unaffordable luxury for most, with popes, emperors, and martial leaders being the only people who wielded the kind of power needed to hire whoever they wanted. This wasn’t solely a financial restraint; how was someone in Roman Africa to travel to Western nations to complete time-bound projects? When they got the rare opportunity, political leaders invested hundreds and thousands of pounds (current estimates) on acquiring their choice of writers and musicians. As all of us know quite well, mediaeval Indian kings enjoyed selecting their favourite artists, teachers, and science experts from all over the country and hosting the Navaratna in the royal courts. It was common knowledge that the best people couldn’t be just the ones in close proximity to us. Working with ‘what we had’ began as a restraint, and continues to be a restraint.
– Not spending time on “who” means a massive amount of waste. Wasted chances and wasted resources. Multiple platforms exist to connect us with skilled professionals and hobbyists, and most businesses use these platforms already. We have a plethora of options: remote WFH teams, remote in-office teams, distributed teams, and/or hybrid work. Each option is a result of very specific employer/employee situational needs. Why would we not exploit the resources available to us for our convenience?
This ‘waste’ spirals all the way to the top. Working with people who aren’t a great fit for us equates to ideas we cannot execute and work we don’t need. The sincere efforts of the misplaced professional is also wasted, because they would have undoubtedly been of more use in an environment more suitable for them.
– If we don’t choose our own cast, we’ll be stuck playing by someone else’s ‘path to success’ script. This script is a collection of societal sign-posts, but neither an individual nor a collective can depend on them for a prosperous future. The only solution is to recognise that we can take a step back, and consider all the options on our plate. There’s no reason for us to keep reliving someone else’s story, however perfect it might seem.
–Asking “Who should I work with?” is the best way of answering who we are as individuals/organizations and what kind of work we need. Business processes are complex, and every work day brings its own set of challenges and frustrations. Questions like “What kind of a colleague are we really looking for?” give us a chance to analyse our current position, goals, and problems. If we asked these questions and studied our answers carefully, it would prevent the downward spiral of wasted time and resources.
Conclusion:
The process of identifying the right person via a few conversations on a chat box and email chains is complex. There are guided services available, but the choice will ultimately be yours. But realising that there is, indeed, a global workforce to help you is a solid point to start with.
There’s a reason that our most popular stories – from oriental archery battles and the Mjolnir that can only be lifted by certain people to Neo or even Harry Potter – focus on finding the right person for a quest. Modern sporting teams from European club football to US soccer leagues and IPL teams leave no stone unturned in trying to find the best person for themselves. Most modern teams have players from all around the world contributing towards extremely high-stakes missions. In no way is this analogy trying to say that we need to launch semi-divine wars or hold a televised auction to find our next graphic designer, but surely our carefully-planned organizations are our own heroic sagas, and we want helping hands we can work with on our terms. All we have to do is realise that we have the choice of defining those terms for ourselves. Businesses (and individuals) can plan to have a team in Latin America take care of customer services and one backend developer in Switzerland. The number of companies managing this successfully is staggering.
