Avery v. Jaime

If I was a business owner, my answer would vary depending on the job. 

In a world where I would hire Avery the job would be in a high stake environment where pay is directly tied to compensation. Now to clarify, I am not staying that the job has to be sales, but Avery would have very specific targets that directly address their skill set. For instance, if this individual was very efficient at programing, they would be required to code a specific number in order to prove useful for the company. If Avery is not reaching the targets set I would see no use to keep Avery on the payroll if they are a slacker. A companies culture could be crippled if Avery sets a standard of low effort so Avery must prove usefulness using a cost-benefit analysis in order for me to keep this individual on my staff. On the other hand, I would hire a Jaime for a role that has lots of human interaction, a great deal of teamwork involved, but low risk and low stress. The main reason why hiring a Jaime would be beneficial is that it would be a boast in moral and set the standard that one must work hard doing every task. A job I could see a Jaime excelling at is working PR for different fundraisers or hosting events to connect and engage with the target customers. These are both very important and big projects for the company but involve lots more people working them, and it is not as worrisome as say if they were in accounting and didn’t know how to balance the books. However, and this is just based on the description, I would not put anything that is new or very difficult to be handled solely by this individual. I would expect a Jamie to be efficient working in a team where another person can delegate, but not something where Jamie is in full control.