We do contracting…lots of contracting. Accuracy and speed is everything. Employee #2 (who actually works for me) is heading for a hard fall.
I’d find #1 more valuable. It sounds like he/she has more potential.
If he’s doing the job more accurately than #2 and he has more think-on-his-feet skills, then he’s better at the current job. And it sounds like he’d be more adaptable if the position grows and changes.
If he’s not going above and beyond the call of duty, ask yourself why. Is there some benefit to him if he does that? Maybe #2 does that because he doesn’t value his own time as much as #1.
Totally depends on the job. In general raw intelligence trumps motivation, but there are plenty of situations where a bad attitude is unacceptable.
I mean if you have one very smart guy seem to not take the job (or you) seriously and you have other employees see that, or have to work with him, it’s either going to rub off, or they’re going to feel resentful, or they’re going to think that’s even preferred behavior. Can be a serious problem. Especially if you keep him and give the axe to someone everyone knows is willing to give their all for the job. It doesn’t always work that way, but it can.
I also don’t understand something - how come #2 is willing to go “above and beyond” but not willing to change their behavior to reduce errors? Have you suggested ways to reduce errors?
Hmm, no one else has qualified their opinion by actually stating what it is they manage and in what industry they work. I’m currently the IT manager for a small private care oncology and diagnostic imaging clinic. Our total staff is about 30 and I supervise one other person at the moment. In my last job I was (amongst many other things, it was a very small ISP in Anchorage) a project manager on a large, and for us unusual, project that required about six part timers to work about two weekends a month and a few days here and there as needed. I was their supervisor when they were around. I’m 25, have a BBA in Management and have been working in IT for the past six years. As an employee I’ve always been a #1, and manage from that point of view.
Now that you know where I’m coming from when I’ll say I prefer employee #1. I worked with both types in the aforementioned project and the #1’s were by far the best to work with. Their mistakes cost * me * time either cleaning them up saturday night or the following Monday or even worse cost me (and the compay) credibility with the customer whenever the same mistakes were made weekend after weekend. Plus slower workers meant I was stuck at work even longer on Saturday nights. I could care less about their motivation to go above and beyond the call of duty or to work as long as it takes, I wanted people that will do the job correctly the first time and then go home. #2’s were the bane of m y existance on that project and I was forced to replace several of them.
In my current situation my employee is really a #3: he usually gets the job done correctly the first time, rarely makes mistakes and never the same one twice but he’s easily distracted by shiney things and if left to his own devices will get a little bit of work done on a lot projects. But if I prioritize things for him they get done in a timely fashion. Of course right now we’re in a crunch and have a lot of work to clear off the list (cleaning up after my predecesor) I think he’ll drift into more a #1 style once our workload goes down and there are less things to distract him.
Like others have said I don’t care if someone finishes their work early, and correctly, then spends the rest of the day screwing off or even going home. Intelligence and comptetence are always more important than dedication. Laziness can also be a positive factor if it’s a driving force behind becoming more efficient.
definately whack #2. I’ve got a three strikes rule. I just can’t afford to not have someone reliable.
I am employee #1 and have gotten fired 5 times for made up reasons (one actually complained that I ‘wistled while working’ sometimes) over people that were horribly stupid, i.e. would dipp snuff behind the counter when they ‘thought’ no one was looking. Why do bosses hate me? Im always on time, never call in, respectful… I need to start my own thread…
Good point.
But I kindof think that if the position is in any kind of company where the product (and the brains behind it) are the important output, then those who can get it done well, and done fast tend to be rewarded with the “perk” of “goof off time”.
I work in the environmental field, we have various types of projects, all have to do, not with how many hours we put it, but how well we do the job, and the sort of “deliverable” we provide to the client (properly disposed hazmat, reporting, compliance assistance) etc.
And like a lawyers office, it’s all about “billable time”. If a client calls for help, or has us in the “field” on physical tasks of the contract, the smallest billing increment is 15 minutes to a half an hour, depending on the company, the contract and the client.
Billable hours pretty much pay for overhead hours. So, it’s pretty much an industry standard (a “reward” or “perk” if you will), that it’s NOT a “hurry, hurry fast food, stressful type atmosphere” and that there WILL be a certain amount of “goof off time”.
Of course this isn’t in writing anywhere, it’s just an unwritten industry standard.
I don’t know what we’d do if we had to get “real” jobs. But as others in this thread have hinted at, or outright said. It’s part of the perks of having the brains, and/or know how to do the job quickly and well.
What’s that old saying??? Something about “rank has its privileges”?
As a semi-#1, I am envious of your employees. I have however, learned that if I work quickly and finish up all my work…I get rewarded by being given half of employee #2’s work because he never gets his work done. So I’d be doing twice as much work and getting no compensation for it (no, not even verbal recognition of a job well done). So now, I find myself gradually slowing down later in the day so as not to finish up early.
Any of you people hiring?
Are you in the enviro biz?? And williing to relocate to alaska??
Bernse
You are considering letting #1 go? Huge red flag for me. If #1 is entirely capable, fast, and can sometimes dazzle with quick fixes and creative insights, then why would you even consider laying off #1?
Put me in the uglybeech court. A bad attitude will lead to trouble of some kind, no matter how well the employee does the work he or she deigns to do.
Along with echoing this question, I wondered what you meant by errors. Are you talking about work that is wrong (i.e., #2 puts tab A in slot C instead of slot B), or are you talking about using #2 processes that are not in line with company standard procedures?
If this is a budget issue, perhaps you could talk to #1 about doing contract work so you get the skills of #1, but #1 is no longer hanging around the office being bored and can look for either other interesting freelance projects or enjoy free time.
Sort answer: The most valuable employee for me is the one with the most commitment to the project goals.
By the way, if this is one of those f’ed up situations where the powers that be are demanding layoffs to make a statement, you have all my sympathy.
If this is just an exercise to work on your managing skills, then I agree with all the excellent advice about finding more for #1 to do and to enlist #1 in getting #2 up to speed.
Additionally, as you may have noticed, the original post was not clear to some of us. Are you sure your instructions to #2 are clear and consistent?