Personality Cafe banner

1 - 16 of 16 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,760 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
How would you make decisions in situations such as 1) having to choose who to lay off in a company, 2) who should win a vacation to the Caribbean, 3) who to choose to work on a team project, etc.?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
1) I would lay off the most ineffective person working for the company, or someone who doesn't need the job and would be financially stable without it. 2) I would give the vacation to a person who deserves it, possibly someone who has experienced a difficult time, and could really use a vacation. 3) I would work with someone who is productive, and would help keep me focused because I tend to procrastinate.
 

·
Registered
ENTJ; 8w7; Persian C
Joined
·
9,448 Posts
1.) The least competent and/or least able to fulfill the objectives of the company.


2.) Pick a number.....


3.) The specimen that is [most competent within the area/position required i.e., after the evaluation/analysis of the projects objectives first and foremost, and also, the specimen that is best with working within environments susceptible to conflicts arising from complex psychological-affairs] (e.g., "dealing with groups of distinct people, with distinct ideas,").
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,760 Posts
1. The least hardworking one AKA the slacker
2.The one who worked the hardest for that year and has been Employee of the month several times.
3.Anyone really, everyone is capable of working on a team project.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,760 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
1) I would for the most part lay off the people who had been there the least amount of time. 2) I would give the vacation to someone who really needs it. Such as someone who works too much and needs a break, or someone who had been wanting to go there for years. 3) I would choose people who had demonstrated skills in that area, and try to make a balanced team that would work well together.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,008 Posts
How would you make decisions in situations such as 1) having to choose who to lay off in a company, 2) who should win a vacation to the Caribbean, 3) who to choose to work on a team project, etc.?
1) The person doing the most economic damage and has the most negative influence on the working environment. If put in real-world application I would have no choice but to lay off the person who was "last in" else I'll have a few extremely powerful organisations heating my ass. It's a fight in court I as an employer cannot win if I decide to go against collective nation-wide agreements and practice.

2) Would outsource it to a system that randomly choose the required amount of winners among contest partakers.

3) I'll pick last because I do not care.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
5,331 Posts
How would you make decisions in situations such as 1) having to choose who to lay off in a company, 2) who should win a vacation to the Caribbean, 3) who to choose to work on a team project, etc.?
1 - I'd start with whoever has the least long-term potential - and I'd be willing to keep someone new, over someone who's proven themselves to be more reliable, if I think the less experienced person has more potential - this potential could be anything, really, work capability, idea generation etc etc.


2 - I'd give it to whoever I think seems to be having the hardest time battling through life.

3 - I'd obviously tailor my team to best suit the project, and make sure to incorporate some 'fresh blood' so to speak, rather than just rely on the more experienced workers - a combination of old and new, I suppose - where the new leads the way, and the old use their experience and insight to make it happen and provide feedback.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,093 Posts
1. As I am only interested in cutting the costs, not much thought needs to go into this. Instead I focus on counting the money.
2. No one.
3. I would apply high profile typology indicator to figure out everyone's strengths and if their personality type opposes mine I'll make their work impossibly difficult until I eventually and inevitably fire them.
 

·
Soop for the Soul
Joined
·
1,741 Posts
1) least competent. If there is someone more competent in a less necessary role I would transfer them to full the spot.
2) only way to make it fair is a blind draw
3) a mix of innovative minds, reliable workers and good communicators since all those things are needed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,112 Posts
1) Depending on my position in the company I'd either make it a team effort or try to have a string of personal conversations to try to find the candidate the least fits with the company/team. If there's someone who doesn't feel like they're the right person for the job they're doing, I'll try and see if maybe they would fit better somewhere else (for example, outside the company).
If that's not an option I doubt I'd be able to just make that decision. I don't think I could work for a company where production numbers outweigh the personal interests of my personnell. (that's why I work as a teacher and not a manager).

2) Probably a lottery to give everyone an equal chance.

3) My ideal candidate would be someone who has the potential but hasn't shown it yet. I'd want to provide an opportunity for someone like that in a safe setting. Either that or someone who has already proven themselves of course.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
306 Posts
How would you make decisions in situations such as 1) having to choose who to lay off in a company,
Either whoever was putting in the least amount of effort, or the one with the overall poorest results. I'm not sure which.

2) who should win a vacation to the Caribbean,
Everyone draws a number.

3) who to choose to work on a team project, etc.?
People who get along and can balance out each other's abilities.
 

·
Registered
ISTJ
Joined
·
1,560 Posts
1) The one that is under performing the most over a sufficient period of time

2) The one that gets the most valuable work done/accomplishes the most goals/crosses the most valuable things off the list. I guess there could be some kind of ticketing system to keep track of this.

3) Those that work well together. The goal is get a good result. If you combine all the good people and all the bad people, separately, there will be some failure. I want to avoid all failure by diversifying the risk. Also, perhaps the bad people aren't really bad in the long run, maybe they just need to be taught differently. There are different managing and working styles that benefit different kinds of people.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,812 Posts
1) having to choose who to lay off in a company
Choose the person that would hurt the company the least if laid off; The person who completes the least amount of high quality work. If that didn't work, who's has the least availability.
2) who should win a vacation to the Caribbean,
Pick the top 10% or so employees who have produced the highest quality/most beneficial work, then roll a dice. The only exception would be if someone is particularly in need of a vacation or would never be able to go to the Caribbean due to circumstance unless it was offered to them for free.
3) who to choose to work on a team project, etc.?
I'd look at everyone's skill sets and try to create a group of people with varied skills that balance out the group. This would vary based on the task of course. Of course, people that don't work well in groups wouldn't be included in the running.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
384 Posts
1. If "laying" someone off would be necessary for the company and I'd be in charge of doing so, the person who would get fired, would be someone who is the least efficient at what he/she/potato is doing.
2. Someone who is very stressed out to the point he/she/tomato cannot do any decent work [but did a great job, when they weren't as stressed as now], a little break wouldn't hurt.
3. Someone who is creative and motivated, yet is still easy-going.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
How would you make decisions in situations such as 1) having to choose who to lay off in a company, 2) who should win a vacation to the Caribbean, 3) who to choose to work on a team project, etc.?
1) I would likely have an idea of who to let go right off the bat, but would do pros and cons for several individuals to take everything into consideration before proceeding. I would definitely consider any individuals that are significantly impacting morale in a negative way. Argumentative, bad attitude, unkind. And of course anyone that just doesn't try hard to pull their own weight. Unfortunately, my company does frequent lay offs and I know that we're just faceless headcount and dollar signs, so these things aren't taken into consideration. But I see how negatively that approach impacts everyone's desire to put forth effort on a daily basis.

2) Giving a trip to one individual seems unfair, like it would create a division. I suppose the only fair way to give this reward would be to take nominations, add top performers and then have the team vote on it, or draw a name.

3) I might present the project outline and expectations to the entire group and ask people to contact me if they're interested in being involved, and then go from there. I think there are many elements to a good team, such as a strong leader that is driven, diplomatic and that people want to get behind, but also hardworking behind-the-scenes individuals that share workload and work together toward a common goal.

I just learned 4 things about myself:
1. I do not want to be a supervisor!!
2. Maybe I do have Fe afterall!?
3. Sports Psychology....
4. I need a vacation!
 
1 - 16 of 16 Posts
Top