9 Comments to “Who would you rather work with?”

1. David Gammel Says:
   

   July 27th, 2005 at 12:10 pm

   I think it is a flawed question. The correct answer is that you can have both. No need to settle for working with talented jerks. Life is too short.

2. RichW Says:
   

   July 27th, 2005 at 4:19 pm

   While David poses the ideal, the question is what it is. I’ll pick the jerk. I can learn more from a talented person. Besides, there are many levels of jerkitude. I’m managed to survive working with psychopaths and sociopaths before. It’s the untalented egomaniacs that ones who need weeding out.

3. Jeff De Cagna Says:
   

   July 28th, 2005 at 8:37 am

   I agree with Sue. A talented jerk can create a toxic situation that diminishes the value and impact of his talent. The more affable person with less innate ability is likely to be a more willing learner and a better team player, both essential attributes in today’s knowledge-driven organizations.

4. Jane Chin Says:
   

   August 2nd, 2005 at 9:58 am

   I can manage a person’s behavior. I can’t manage a person’s talent.

5. Paula H. Says:
   

   August 2nd, 2005 at 10:07 am

   I think it depends. If I’m supposed to be in ‘learning mode’ with this person, and what I learn is critical to my success, then I’ll bite the bullet and pick the jerk to work with. On the other hand, if I’m in “teaching mode” I’ll take the less skilled but affable person. I can learn from a jerk, but I’ve found out from experience that it’s difficult for ME to instruct and train a jerk. The personalities clash too much.

6. Beth Hunter Says:
   

   August 2nd, 2005 at 10:08 am

   I’ve worked with both. While I’ve enjoyed working with the more likable character, I’ve learned more from the jerks. The education is not only in making sure you never end up like the jerk, but also the reason the person is a jerk. Mine have been such detailed jerks that it caused the office to be much more attentive to detail (so as not to anger the god). Another jerk in the office was an expert in the field. This pushed me to learn more about the science so I could be in meetings and hold my own without looking stupid.

7. Randy L Estes Says:
   

   August 2nd, 2005 at 10:11 am

   I disagree with Jane. If someone is a complete *jerk*, you can’t manage that behavior, short of termination. If you can’t mentor and/or manage a person’s behavior, that speaks more to your leadership abilities.
   In concert with Jeff, some who creates a toxic environment, has a direct impact on all of those who have to work/interact with him/her.You risk the chance of losing your good employees because they come to loathe the work environment. Or you spend an inordinate amount of time trying to apease and counsel the jerk and the co-workers being impacted. You spend so much of your life at work. Life is too short to put up with psycho/sociopaths.

8. Sue Pelletier Says:
   

   August 4th, 2005 at 9:27 am

   What is so interesting to me is the different ways people are interpreting “skills” (here, at the FastCo poll, and in other blogs). To me, skills don’t necessarily equate with talent, or creativity, or intelligence. They’re just skills, like typing, or coffee-cup counting, or knowing what to ask on a site inspection. These things, unlike talent, creativity, and intelligence, are learnable skills. So, I stand by my answer, but love this conversation!

9. Cj Bader Says:
   

   August 6th, 2005 at 1:25 pm

   It seems that when the program is going on is a bit too late to discover that the “team” doesn’t work well together. Planning the staff is as important as the event. It should be a positive experience for all. And is the case at times, when there are glitches or tense times, it can be handled more smoothly.

Leave a Comment