Avery or Jamie? That is the question.

If I had to choose between hiring Avery or Jamie, I think I would choose Jamie. I would rather have someone that is consistent and can be counted on rather than someone who is below average most of the time that has an occasional burst of brilliance. The key for me choosing Jamie over Avery is consistency. Someone who is reliable, does a steady amount of good work, and is predictable would be easier to account for. Their work output would be predictable making the job as a manager easier. Also, you would know Jamie’s weakness which is when the stress gets turned up, Jamie may not perform as well. You could manage this situation by pulling in other teammates to help compensate. Avery seems to be too much of a wildcard. Avery may be fantastic every now and then. However, the inconsistency would be hard to manage and account for.

Hiring someone like Avery may be a better choice in a job where there is already a solid team. If the team Avery is joining is very consistent and solid, Avery will most likely get by with a below average performance. Then, when Avery is at his best and thriving, the team will really accomplish a lot. More specifically, I think of a job along the lines of product development. Having someone who has the ability to come up with a really great idea occasionally or perform when the pressure is high, would be valuable on a product development team.

Hiring someone like Jamie would be better in a job where consistency is needed. Jamie would most likely bring a lot of stability to a team due to the solid, consistent performance. If the job is going to have a lot of high stress moments, it is probably not a good fit for Jamie though. A specific job example might be in accounting or finance. I imagine consistency and solid performance is very important in that job. I am not too familiar with the job to know how many high-stress moments it has, but I think it may be a good fit.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

2 responses to “Avery or Jamie? That is the question.”

  1. Hi Steven,

    You had a lot of great points in your post. Choosing to hire Jaime because she is consistent and a good worker almost all of the time is a great decision. I also made that decision because I value consistency. I feel like in the end, more work is done from someone who stays at a steady consistent level all the time rather than someone who is really good on certain days, but lacks most of the other time. I like your point about hiring Avery somewhere where there is already a consistent team, thats a good idea too.

    Great post.

  2. Hi John,

    I have to agree with you; I also chose to hire Jamie. This week’s mini-lecture referred to what to look for in criteria when creating job descriptions. The most significant factor is relevance, which I think in this situation determines that Jaime is the better fit for the position. I also enjoyed how you mentioned what steps could be taken when Jaime cannot perform to the standard needed under pressure. Avery possesses high potential and low consistency, which, as you mentioned, can be helpful in a team environment. Avery could be a good fit for a car salesman from an outside perspective. It seems like they have instructions, high-stress selling moments, and low consistency requirements when they are not selling.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.