If I were in the shoes of a business owner and needed to fill an essential position I would hire Jaime. I think the fact that it’s an essential position, I would rather have someone that consistently does a good job rather than someone that occasionally does an amazing job. As a business owner, I would want someone who I don’t have to worry about not showing up or making a crucial or dangerous mistake that could hurt the business even if they were really impressive sometimes. The risks associated with Jaime are less in my opinion than Avery.
A performer like Avery with high maximal but low typical performance would be a good fit for something like a seasonal job, or a job based on commission, being a real estate agent, or being a professional athlete. Something where short bursts of being great would work, but consistency doesn’t matter too much. I think these jobs would be a good fit for someone with this type of performance because they aren’t consistently needing to perform, but their natural ability would help them do well. I think having a personal stake in their pay such as commission or real estate could make someone in these positions succeed even though they aren’t governed primarily by motivation. Avery could be commonly perceived in this situation to be a valuable candidate because her best is great, she probably has an impressive resume. However, I don’t feel that she would be the best hire if I owned a business because she’s a slacker and day to day doesn’t provide good results.
A performer like Jaime with low maximal but high levels of typical performance would be a good fit for a company that needs to hire someone who is reliable and consistent. I think someone like Jaime would be a better fit than someone with similar levels of performance to Avery in a customer service job where they need to consistently represent a brand. Things like being a cashier, working in food service or different retailers, even hosting at a restaurant in my opinion are all jobs where consistent, good performance is essential. Someone with low maximal but high typical performance could be good at being an accountant, or something like an X-ray technician. These are jobs where I think day to day the duties are relatively similar, and they don’t ever require crazy levels of impressive performance.
One response to “Week 5: Typical vs Maximal performance”
Hey Emily,
Great job with your blog post this week. I agree with you 100% that having someone who is consistent is a lot more appealing then someone like Avery. Knowing the capabilities and limitation of an employee can help you plan on the requirements for certain situations. If you can’t rely on someone it can be very difficult to put them in tough situations as you don’t know if they will come through for you.
When writing my blog post I struggled to come up with a position that would work well for workers like Avery. I think you were right on though to suggest something with a commission. This way the worker has to motivate themselves to achive higher pay and the company gets hurt less for non-performance. I enjoyed reading your post, keep up the good work!