Distinguishing ‘Right Person’ from ‘Right Seat’ in Employee Retention, According to Mark O’Donnell

In a recent LinkedIn post, Mark O’Donnell addresses a critical challenge faced by many business leaders: the difficult decision to let an employee go. O’Donnell argues that founders often misdiagnose the root cause of an underperforming team member, leading to potentially damaging outcomes. He emphasizes the importance of correctly identifying whether the issue lies with the individual’s cultural fit or their suitability for the specific role.

O’Donnell highlights a common pitfall where struggling employees are all categorized under a single umbrella of “not working out.” This, he contends, obscures the reality that there are typically two distinct problems requiring different solutions: the ‘Right Person’ and the ‘Right Seat.’

“Before you make the hard call to let someone go, you HAVE to name the problem right. Most founders don’t. They lump every struggling team member into one bucket labeled ‘not working out,’ then agonize over what to do.”

The ‘Right Person’ vs. ‘Right Seat’ Distinction

According to O’Donnell, the ‘Right Person’ refers to an individual who embodies the company’s core values and thrives within its culture. He suggests this is assessed using a ‘People Analyzer,’ which measures individuals against established values and leadership-set benchmarks. This evaluation focuses on cultural alignment and behavioral fit.

In contrast, the ‘Right Seat’ focuses on whether an employee ‘GWC’s the role – meaning they Get it, Want it, and have the Capacity to do it. O’Donnell stresses that this assessment is only meaningful if the role itself is clearly defined on an Accountability Chart.

Identifying the Symptoms of Misalignment

Mark O’Donnell outlines distinct patterns of behavior that differentiate between a ‘Wrong Person’ and a ‘Wrong Seat’ situation. He points out that a ‘Wrong Person’ might still hit targets but causes damage to team dynamics, cuts corners, or is someone you wouldn’t rehire even if skilled. Such individuals, O’Donnell suggests, rarely improve significantly and are often better suited for environments where their values align better.

“Wrong Person: Hits their targets but leaves damage on the team; Cuts corners the moment no one’s looking; People quietly dread being assigned with them; Skilled, but you’d never want a whole team of them; Knowing what you know now, you wouldn’t rehire; Embellishes the truth to protect their image.”

Conversely, O’Donnell describes a ‘Wrong Seat’ scenario where the team likes the individual, but work quality or output suffers. These employees may not fully grasp the demands of their role, seem mentally checked out, or find themselves overwhelmed, especially if the role has expanded. O’Donnell notes that in these cases, the issue is often solvable by moving the employee to a seat they GWC, thereby retaining a good person.

“Wrong Seat: The team loves them, but the work keeps slipping; Never fully grasps what the seat actually demands; Mentally checked out of this specific job; Thrived in a smaller version, now in over their head; You keep quietly finishing pieces of their work; Two people crammed into one fuzzy seat.”

The Consequence of Misdiagnosis

O’Donnell warns that misinterpreting a ‘Seat’ issue as a ‘People’ issue can lead to firing someone who simply needed a better-fitting role. Conversely, mistaking a ‘People’ issue for a ‘Seat’ problem means retaining an individual who is fundamentally misaligned with the company’s values, while potentially frustrating and alienating top performers who witness the situation.

He concludes by emphasizing that using structured tools like the People Analyzer, GWC, and Accountability Chart helps leaders avoid guesswork and make more informed, effective decisions regarding their teams. O’Donnell also points to resources available through EOS Academy for those seeking to deepen their understanding and application of these principles.