By Tilly Boateng
In 2023, Gallup reported that only 23 percent of employees worldwide describe themselves as engaged at work. Low engagement is not simply a morale issue; it is an economic one. Gallup estimates that disengagement costs the global economy approximately $8.8 trillion annually in lost productivity. At the heart of this crisis is not a shortage of talent. It is often a failure of leadership, culture and hiring judgement.
The phrase, widely attributed to Richard Branson, “Hire character. Train skill.” may sound like a motivational slogan, but it carries serious economic implications. In an era where businesses invest heavily in technical training, digital transformation and automation, perhaps the most undervalued asset remains human character.
Character in a professional context is not vague morality. It is measurable behaviour. It shows up as accountability, integrity, resilience, emotional intelligence and the ability to collaborate. Skills, by contrast, are technical competencies. They include coding languages, financial modelling, regulatory knowledge, data analysis and sector-specific expertise. Skills can be taught through training programmes, mentorship and repetition. Character, while capable of growth, is more deeply embedded in values and behavioural patterns.
Research supports the argument that character-linked traits influence business outcomes. A landmark study by Google, known as Project Oxygen, found that the highest-performing managers were not those with the strongest technical expertise. Instead, they excelled in coaching, communication, empathy and support for career development. Technical skill ranked far lower than interpersonal competence. In short, soft skills were not soft at all. They were economically strategic.
The cost of poor hiring decisions is also significant. The US Department of Labor has previously estimated that the cost of a bad hire can equal up to 30 percent of the employee’s first-year earnings. Beyond direct financial loss, there are hidden costs: team disruption, reputational damage and lowered morale. When organisations prioritise impressive CVs over ethical alignment and collaborative mindset, they often pay for it later.
From a SHEconomics lens, this conversation becomes even more layered. Women globally continue to navigate hiring systems that often scrutinise personality more than competence. According to McKinsey’s 2023 Women in the Workplace report, women are still underrepresented at every stage of the corporate pipeline, particularly at senior levels. Meanwhile, studies from the Harvard Business Review have highlighted how men are frequently hired or promoted based on perceived potential, while women are assessed based on proven performance.
If businesses genuinely embraced character-based hiring, what would change? Would empathy, adaptability and collaborative leadership finally be valued at the same level as assertiveness and technical bravado? Would more women ascend into leadership roles in environments that recognise emotional intelligence as a strategic advantage rather than a secondary trait?
Globally, the economic case for inclusive and values-based leadership is compelling. A 2020 McKinsey report found that companies in the top quartile for gender diversity on executive teams were 25 percent more likely to achieve above-average profitability compared to those in the bottom quartile. While diversity alone does not guarantee performance, inclusive leadership cultures, which are grounded in fairness and integrity, correlate strongly with financial outcomes.
In emerging markets across Africa, Asia and Latin America, the argument becomes even more practical. Many businesses operate in high-trust ecosystems where relationships drive opportunity. In such contexts, character is not a luxury. It is infrastructure. Founders often rely on lean teams, where one person’s integrity can determine client retention or investor confidence. Technical gaps can be closed through training, partnerships and digital tools. Ethical gaps are harder to repair.
However, the concept of hiring for character must be applied carefully. “Culture fit” has sometimes been misused as a proxy for similarity, reinforcing bias and excluding diverse voices. True character-based hiring should not mean selecting people who look, think or speak alike. It should mean assessing alignment with transparent values such as accountability, respect, inclusion and ethical responsibility.
For women in leadership, this principle offers both opportunity and challenge. Women entrepreneurs frequently build companies rooted in relational leadership, mentorship and long-term trust. These attributes, once dismissed as secondary, are increasingly recognised as critical in volatile and uncertain economies. At the same time, women professionals must continue to develop technical competence, ensuring that skill and character reinforce rather than replace one another.
Ultimately, the future of sustainable business will depend on a recalibration of what we reward. In a digital economy where tools evolve rapidly and technical knowledge has a short shelf life, the capacity to learn, adapt and lead ethically may be the true competitive advantage.
Hiring character and training skill is not sentimental advice. It is economic foresight. Trust reduces friction. Integrity protects reputation. Emotional intelligence strengthens teams. When organisations give opportunity to those who demonstrate these qualities, they gain resilience, loyalty and long-term growth. In a global marketplace shaped by uncertainty, perhaps the smartest investment a business can make is not in software, but in values.
