In the given scenario, if I were in the position of the business and I had to chose to hire Avery or Jaime, I would chose Jaime. The reason I would chose to hire Jaime is because he is reliable and consistent which Avery is not. His performance ceiling may be higher and has more potential, however in times when I would need him I wouldn’t be able to rely on him. With Jaime, I know that he may not be the best performer, however I do know what to expect of him and It’ll make it easier to help push the boundaries of his performance ceiling. I think that Avery would be a great candidate for a sales job. He has a high quality performance,, but low consistency. This is the kind of attitude that would be great a salesman. Sales positions don’t need the consistency. Sales aren’t consistent, so the traffic level of the industry will match his attitude. A job that would be better for Jaime (low performance, high consistency, would be a office desk job. Something like doing reception or being an assistant. Typically when you have the low performance level but high consistency, you tend to need a lot of direction. Assistants go off of direction and need to be reliable. Jaime would be reliable and doesn’t need to worry about having a high skill floor that is being wasted on something boring.
One response to “Typical Vs. Maximal Performance”
Hi Killian. Like yourself, I would lean towards hiring Jaime more often than hiring Avery. I agree, consistency is a valuable employee trait, particularly when working in an environment where collaboration and teamwork is key to success. Both individuals have their respective pros and cons, so for me it might come down to the best individual fit for the job type.
I liked your idea of a sales position being job types that might best suit Avery’s maximal performance behavior.