As a business owner facing a critical hiring decision, I’ve narrowed my options to two intriguing candidates: Avery and Jaime. Avery has sky-high potential but tends to underperform on a regular basis. Jaime, on the other hand, delivers consistent, solid work every day but lacks the ability to go above and beyond in high-pressure situations.
If I had to choose, I would hire Jaime. While Avery’s best days might outshine everyone, I can’t build a reliable business operation on unpredictability. Jaime’s steady output provides the consistency I need to meet deadlines, satisfy clients, and maintain workflow stability. In most businesses, daily dependability trumps the occasional burst of brilliance.
That said, a role in creative strategy or innovation consulting might be perfect for someone like Avery. These positions reward big, bold ideas and value breakthrough moments over routine execution. If the work involves pitching high-impact campaigns or solving complex problems that require flashes of genius, Avery’s high ceiling can be a competitive advantage—even if their baseline performance lags.
On the flip side, a job like data entry, pharmacy dispensing, or customer service is better suited for someone like Jaime. These roles require precision, repetition, and steady focus. Mistakes or off-days can create downstream issues, so consistency is key. Jaime’s predictability ensures quality and trust, making them an invaluable asset in roles where small errors can lead to big consequences.
In the end, the “right” hire depends on the job’s demands. Talent may win headlines, but consistency builds companies. Would you bet on brilliance—or show up every day with someone who always gets the job done?
