Natural talent vs hard work

[SadandConfusedWA]

Which one would you rather be complimented on?

 

I can be a bit lazy and unmotivated at times but tend to have bursts of ideas that usually result in very high quality work. However, I have been told that my work ethic is not that great in a joking manner (by a co-worker, not by a supervisor but I know there is a lot of truth to that).

 

On the other hand, I see hard working people who kill themselves working to always produce mediocre work at best (from what I can tell anyway).

 

It's usually one or the other, with a rare few exceptions that are both.

[Norville_Rogers]

I have a guy that works for me that does not work very hard but he is an exceptional worker (but only when he puts his mind to it). I'd rather have 100 hard workers that I know will give me a strong honest days work everyday than have one guy that I've got to work harder for to make sure my business is running as optimal as it can be. Let's just put it this way....I'm working on squeezing this one guy out because all he's doing is dragging the morale of my other 99 workers. They all know he's a good worker....but they also all know that his attitude is too negative to have in the workplace.

[Scrybe]

I'm just the same way and have asked myself this question. After managing a business or awhile I came to this conclusion:

 

If you own and/or run a business you're likely to prefer hard work to brilliance/talent. People are dependable, consistent and produce when you need them to.

 

However I think personalities like yours (and mine) are more valued in higher level work or the creative field.

 

I've had to really improve my work ethic to succeed in my current position but I'm on the lookout for an opportunity that better fits my natural style. Until then I keep my head down and pluck away as much as I can without going crazy.

Which one would you rather be complimented on?

 

I can be a bit lazy and unmotivated at times but tend to have bursts of ideas that usually result in very high quality work. However, I have been told that my work ethic is not that great in a joking manner (by a co-worker, not by a supervisor but I know there is a lot of truth to that).

 

On the other hand, I see hard working people who kill themselves working to always produce mediocre work at best (from what I can tell anyway).

 

It's usually one or the other, with a rare few exceptions that are both.

[Tayla]

Trying to consider if there are even folks out there as you describe...

After being employed for 30 years I have yet to find the burst of energy person that last very long in the industries I have worked in. They range from medical, hotel, catering, postal, & currently admin for network company. Maybe if its an advertising or something that requires On the fly Notions, then yeah I can see how that skill is important, otherwise most industries warrant accuracy, diligence, timeliness, coherence to policy.

Interesting though to ponder based on job type...

[Feelin Frisky]

I used to think I had no real talents. I was a flashy bass guitarist when younger but I couldn't sing and play at the same time. And my friends who could and had songwriting talent had no ambition. It took me quite some time to realize that my vision IS my talent. I can see so many things that other people do that if framed the right way will separate the wheat from the chaff (a producer's eye).

 

I have applied that talent to the whole of the so-called digital revolution and have a creative vision of a new media application that I'm sure can't fail. The trouble is living in a world where people have a little more than one foot still in the Industrial Revolution and don't understand the true potential of non-linear media power. And because they are busy with their own pursuits, they can't stretch their minds around what I have put together. I need an angel investor and now is a lousy time for VC. Everyone wants instant returns and don't seem to want to entertain something that will drive and sustain change to become the billion dollar enterprise after a few years that everyone else missed. I've had my 10% inspiration. Now I face 90% perspiration and unfortunately more than a few degrees of separation.

[Green]

I'm in a field where Talent ALONE is not enough. Hard work plus lots of talent is what I need to make it through the day. I often strugle with how hard I have to work but IT IS WORTH IT.

[demrea]

I'm in a field where Talent ALONE is not enough. Hard work plus lots of talent is what I need to make it through the day. I often strugle with how hard I have to work but IT IS WORTH IT.

 

ok i bite, what do you do?

 

 

i am the person who worked real hard when i first started, missed my entire young adulthood working and reached a level where everyone else does the hard work and i do the work no one else wants to do.

 

like stand in a room giving a presentation for a 45 million dollar contract to an Oil & Energy CEO.

 

the people who work with their brain, make more and seem to do less but its much harder to pull this off.

the people who work with their hands and back, make less and seem to do a lot more and its much easier to maintain.

 

odd dynamics, no?

[D-Lish]

As a Manager, I'll take hard work over a lazy natural talent ANY day.

 

You rely on people that are consistent and that demonstrate a strong work ethic.

 

I have people under my belt that turn on and off their sales depending on their mood. When you come to realize that they are motivated according to their own whims, they become way less valuable to you.

[demrea]

As a Manager, I'll take hard work over a lazy natural talent ANY day.

 

You rely on people that are consistent and that demonstrate a strong work ethic.

 

I have people under my belt that turn on and off their sales depending on their mood. When you come to realize that they are motivated according to their own whims, they become way less valuable to you.

 

no question, but you are talking about front / field level right?

 

if i am managing at that level, i want the worker bees and thats where you find them.

 

however, if i personally want to rise above that, you have to be able to work with your brain and mouth and often that comes at the expense of your labour effort. its just the dynamic, not sure if its fair or not or even universal, but its been my experience.

[D-Lish]

no question, but you are talking about front / field level right?

 

if i am managing at that level, i want the worker bees and thats where you find them.

 

however, if i personally want to rise above that, you have to be able to work with your brain and mouth and often that comes at the expense of your labour effort. its just the dynamic, not sure if its fair or not or even universal, but its been my experience.

 

District Management. It's all about sales, the bottom line counts.

If an associate under a manager has awesome sales one month and mediocre the next, I get on the Manager to turn things around.

 

When you're in sales, it's always going to be about the bottom line.

 

If a Manager can't motivate an associate, the manager is the one that will take the heat for it.

 

I expect that a manager can motivate their team, if they can't, they won't be a manager under me for long. So- if an associate is lazy, the manager will take the heat.

 

A good manager will motivate the people under them. If someone is only capable of showing a glimmer of greatness when they choose to, they won't advance, and they won't last long.

[demrea]

District Management. It's all about sales, the bottom line counts..

 

is this retail or corporate?

 

i ask because when you say associates i think of retail sales and those roles are no different then worker bees at an office.

 

corporate sales has a huge ratio of slackers, thats why they are in sales because they dont want to work hard.

 

however, there are a percentage of brilliant, effective and wealthy people in sales who dont look to work very hard. however, the work is very difficult and only the sharpest of minds can make it.

 

i think the key is there is a difference between difficult and hard.

[threebyfate]

It depends on the type of work you do and the field you're in.

 

If you're part of a chain of events, consistency is more important.

 

If you're front line staff where your sales affect bottomline, consistency is important.

 

If you're doing project related work and with flashes of brilliance make milestones, then it's good. If you can't make milestones, then it's bad since you're delaying the entire project and time means money.

 

If you're in management and aren't consistent, you're a goner.

[demrea]

i think there is a reason most worker bees think the executives dont do much.

 

executives dont have to work hard, but very few could do their job if challenged.

 

i dont have a worker bee job and i know people think i dont work hard. however, not one of them could do what i do nor be brave enough to do it.

 

maybe i am rambling now lol

 

 

edit: that sounds a bit arrogant, of course anyone else could do it if thats what they wanted to, but its a not a switch you can flick. if you can work with your brain and mouth instead of your back and hands, you generally make a lot more money and its not just cause you know how to ass kiss, although thats what it looks like to people who work with their backs and hands.

[threebyfate]

Successful executives work damn hard.

[demrea]

Successful executives work damn hard.

 

Yes, but generally with their brains and mouth, not their hands and back.

[threebyfate]

It's all quantifiable in dollars and cents. If an executive isn't on top of her/his game, they're toast since dollars and cents won't be rolling in consistently and someone leaner and meaner will take them down.

 

Using your description, you could be describing a call centre employee.

[carhill]

Natural talent vs hard work

Which one would you rather be complimented on?

 

Doesn't matter to me. Compliments and criticism don't define my perspective. I work in a very brutal business and people f*ck with each other's minds for sport. The 'compliment' could merely be a setup or an end run to gain a business advantage.

 

Men in my blue collar world generally gain respect from consistent hard work, with talent being secondary. IOW, we'll let someone go who's talented but a lazy azz. A hard worker, even one with 'mediocre' work, can be trained and positioned to benefit the company. It's all about matching wages to talent to position to maximize profits. Inconsistency, especially in work ethic, is generally a irreconcilable negative. Also, generally, the truly talented in my world tend to be the kind of people who become competitors rather than long-term, productive employees. They use their employment to springboard into their own business. Their psychology isn't that of an employee.

 

In the world of theory and analysis and science, it might be a different dynamic. I've never worked in that world, nor in the 'executive office', so have no knowledge. Different paths for each of us.

[Ariadne]

Natural talent vs hard work

 

It would be natural talent since I wouldn't be very proud of hard work.

 

If someone says, you've worked so hard! I'd be

[anne1707]

To achieve real, lasting success, you need both. I see graduates who think their natural talent alone will be enough and ignoring that fact that they need to work hard and gain the respect of their colleagues (at all levels) if they are to ever progress.

[Taramere]

Natural talent vs hard work

 

It would be natural talent since I wouldn't be very proud of hard work.

 

If someone says, you've worked so hard! I'd be

 

I'd feel the same. Like getting a school report with A for effort, B for achievement.

 

That said, I think that talent on its own might bring some people more problems than good results. For one thing, talent often invokes jealousy and efforts to sabotage the talented person's confidence so that they underachieve. Anyone who's been involved in a competitive sport will probably have encountered the kind of gamesmanship whereby the better you're doing, the more hostility you encounter.

 

There's been a fair bit in the UK press recently about the bitchiness that goes on in the women's locker room at Wimbledon....and the psyching out of very talented young players by more experienced ones. I think that talent has to be combined with hard work, but that that isn't necessarily enough. A very talented individual - especially if she's female - is going to need to develop a strong hide to protect her from others' efforts to undermine her.

 

I think it's something employers need to maintain awareness of, and that often a useful approach is to have an experienced, trustworthy worker act as the talented individual's mentor.

[Crusoe]

That said, I think that talent on its own might bring some people more problems than good results. For one thing, talent often invokes jealousy and efforts to sabotage the talented person's confidence so that they underachieve. Anyone who's been involved in a competitive sport will probably have encountered the kind of gamesmanship whereby the better you're doing, the more hostility you encounter.

 

 

Oh yes, talent and hard work aren't enough, especially in solitary sports like tennis or golf, eventualy it's a test of mental strength and character. Any insult is a compliment, that's the way I look at it.

 

Personally I rather be complimented on hard work. I had a natural talent, it was a gift, one I took for granted and wasted, nowadays when I do well in a tournament I have to do it on hard work. It may be vain but the recognition I get for a win nowadays means more to me than anything I did a talented kid.

[Ariadne]

I'd feel the same. Like getting a school report with A for effort, B for achievement.

 

That said, I think that talent on its own might bring some people more problems than good results. For one thing, talent often invokes jealousy and efforts to sabotage the talented person's confidence so that they underachieve. Anyone who's been involved in a competitive sport will probably have encountered the kind of gamesmanship whereby the better you're doing, the more hostility you encounter.

 

There's been a fair bit in the UK press recently about the bitchiness that goes on in the women's locker room at Wimbledon....and the psyching out of very talented young players by more experienced ones. I think that talent has to be combined with hard work, but that that isn't necessarily enough. A very talented individual - especially if she's female - is going to need to develop a strong hide to protect her from others' efforts to undermine her.

 

I think it's something employers need to maintain awareness of, and that often a useful approach is to have an experienced, trustworthy worker act as the talented individual's mentor.

 

I suppose..

 

I tend to avoid competition and work in an environment of cooperation.

 

In fact, if I were to have any talents I'd like to apply them to help other people so that probably would be welcome.

 

I have a talented cousin who is a Pediatrician, and wherever she goes people seem to fall in love with her and give her presents. I'd say she has charisma.

[Taramere]

I suppose..

 

I tend to avoid competition and work in an environment of cooperation.

 

I'm surprised by that. I've often detected a certain competitiveness about your posts.

 

Personally I rather be complimented on hard work. I had a natural talent, it was a gift, one I took for granted and wasted, nowadays when I do well in a tournament I have to do it on hard work.

 

Are you a golfer, Crusoe?

[Ariadne]

I'm surprised by that. I've often detected a certain competitiveness about your posts.

 

Projection maybe.

[Taramere]

Projection maybe.

 

Oh no. Projection is when you accuse others of what you won't admit to in yourself. I freely admit that I can be competitive. I don't think there's anything wrong with it, provided you acknowledge it and keep a grip on it.