Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Say you had a team of, say, 8 persons. And in that eight you had two star performers.
Performer A, whilst more reserved in personality, is very articulate, and very knowledgeable in his work. She continually produces suggestions, which improve the team's working and efficiency. She also is very proactive, and seldom needs to be told and instructed to solve problems and execute tasks. Performer A is also the biggest contributor to team meetings, and not just waffle. She always makes reasoned and pertinent points. She perhaps needs more training in decision-making.
Performer B is also reserved, and she is very dependable and solid. Whilst she is not as articulate as performer A, her dependability and solidity are her strengths. Performer B is the team leader, but she does not contribute as well to team meetings, which could denote a lack of confidence, or an unwillingness to voice her opinions.
In terms of work attitude, both persons are generally equal. They meet deadlines to a very high percentage (about 95 per cent for both persons, and when work is not completed, it is for a good reason), they get on well and joke around with other department members, and have both gained a reputation for good work from other departments. They also dress well and professionally, and are team players in that they collaborate, share information and confer information with their team-mates.
A friend of mine works in a PR firm, and says in her team, these two persons are the best performers by far. However, she is considering both of them for management posts, but she does not want any conflict arising between them, as both show a lot of potential. Ideally, she wants to make both of them in middle management. Is this what she should do?
I'm not sure what you're after here? But the way you've described them, they sound identical = they're both solid, dependable workers who are reserved. What exactly is the question?
In PR, person A would be the better choice for an advancement given the details you provided. In certain other fields person B would most likely be my choice.
Are you sure B is a natural leader? I've never met a leader who doesn't express their opinions except when they are trying to get others to express theirs. Perhaps B expresses their opinions more than you think...
Something doesn't quite add up, it just doesn't make total sense.
That being said, how much more reliable is B? What's the position (general description)?
Location: Stuck on the East Coast, hoping to head West
4,641 posts, read 12,017,281 times
Reputation: 9891
The question is pretty vague, but just b/c a person does well in her current non-management position doesn't necessarily make her a good manager.. In this case, I'd probably do a quick write up of what I was looking for in this management position and then compare that to the skillset of the two performers. Also, if performer B is already a team leader, then why wouldn't she be promoted?
In PR, person A would be the better choice for an advancement given the details you provided. In certain other fields person B would most likely be my choice.
PR isn't just talking to the press. Worst case you could separate the positions for press releases and media kits. Let person A do the writing/talking person B work on risk management, mitigation, etc.
I see where you'd come to that conclusion annerk, but I don't necessarily think it's right.
Either way, this is impossible to say. You probably have an instinct, go with it. We don't have nearly the facts that you do, so unless you are prepared to give us tons more information, I think you are the best decision maker.
Person B does express opinions, but not necessarily openly, or in public fora. I think part of a management role is to appear authoritative, and she needs to learn how to be so. People would think she in under-confident if she did this in a management role.
Person A would be a top performer if she was able to size up decisions better. Both work in security management, and both a good understanding of security systems. I think person A has the edge in that regard in that she is often the one who brings the team to the attention of new technology in the field. Person A as I hear it can see the bigger picture better, and can strategise to a better degree (which is also another management skill).
In general though, both produce high quality work, and as said before produce work on time for a high percentage of the time. The team also had a challenge with a trainee who joined several months ago, and were instrumental in devising a plan for him to develop.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
