There is a small discussion going on about how some people choose mediocrity for their careers. I started to leave a comment but realized that I’d love to separate it out from the other issues addressed in that post. Let’s get some laser focus in on this thing and let some of my super smart readers take a shot at this issue. I’ll go over where I stand on this issue to start off.
You want to choose mediocrity? Cool with me. Do me a favor though? Just identify yourself at the door. It will make my job much easier in the end because I will place you in a position that has a higher tolerance for mediocrity. For some positions, doing your job and going home is adequate. For some positions, it isn’t adequate but you can tolerate it because you pay them less, it is less consequential (but not inconsequential) or whatever. For some positions, mediocrity won’t cut it. Period. End of sentence. No exceptions.
Nobody wants a mediocre doctor. Or a mediocre airplane pilot. Or a mediocre lawyer. And while I am certain that there are some mediocre folks in every one of those fields, my feeling is that reputable firms aim to avoid a pattern of mediocrity. After all, if too many of your patients die, too many planes fall from the sky or too many cases are lost, you won’t have to worry about a career path. It will just have ended itself.
(Just a quick note here: There is a difference between being mediocre and being ranked lower within your organization. I think the worst doctor at the Mayo Clinic is unlikely to be a mediocre doctor. Similarly, the guy warming the bench on the worst NBA team in the league can still beat 99% of the world in basketball. If you’ve ever seen my physical response to forced ranking performance management systems, now you know why.)
If you choose mediocrity, you are choosing career limitation. For some, there is peace with that decision. For others, there is outrage that you have to be limited because you chose what you chose. I don’t care what you pick. Unless I want to hire you. Then I care just enough to figure out where to put you.
Here’s a clue if you’ve chosen mediocrity and you don’t like the consequences: deal with it or change your game. Because you have no choice. Mediocre people placed in positions where mediocrity can’t be tolerated are eaten alive.
Even typically ancillary positions within an organization can have their tolerance for average work be impacted. How do mediocre recruiters find rockstar talent? It is dumb luck if they get any. If you don’t pay bills on time and your supply line seizes up, it doesn’t matter if you have that rockstar ops manager. So the more your organization is relied upon by others either in life or death situations, those that impact livelihoods, or those that serve society, your tolerance for mediocrity goes down to nothing. Unless you’re the government of course.
What are your thoughts on this?
January 14, 2010 at 7:55 am
Lance, couldn’t agree more with most of this — I’d like to know how your readers define mediocrity. I’d also like to know what you’re supposed to do when the leaders at your company can’t properly define mediocrity? I’m thinking of the automakers. I’m sure there are great people doing amazing things at Ford but they’ll never get a chance to shine because some guy in a board room is making bad decisions about talent & the future of the company.
January 14, 2010 at 7:58 am
My favorite…people choosing to be dull and mediocre. Here’s my old man rant: What to know what’s wrong with big business? People wanting to achieve mediocrity. I say they should be thrown out on their ass. I would never employ a person who said they wanted to do just enough. I’m happy they’re in the ranks of the unemployed…and they should clear out if they are working.
January 14, 2010 at 8:09 am
I’ve been having this conversation this week. Trying to get my ops manager to understand that there is a line between “being mediocre” and “failing to get the job done”.
I have several mediocre guys working here. They do their jobs and go home. The ops manager wants them to be rockstars – but they aren’t going to be.
So, do we fire the guy that knows how to do the job, and is doing the job, but has no interest in rising to management, or do we hire the guy that wants to be the ops manager, to fill a role that will bore him to tears.
This is a small company, there’s just a smidge of room at the top, and I contend that if I hire a complete team of rockstars, they are going to leave when they realize that they will be going nowhere, fast.
Sometimes you need the worker bees.
Sometimes you need the A Player.
Its our job to figure out which one goes where.
January 14, 2010 at 10:01 am
Oh, I don’t know. I don’t condone mediocrity and I can’t stand it. I don’t like the idea that people are choosing that. I know that they do, some very close people to me do, but I don’t understand the point. And I don’t like when they then complain about their jobs. Can you ever justify mediocrity? I don’t think so.
January 14, 2010 at 10:07 am
@Tammy said for me. Some people are just content to do they job they are doing, and do it well, but then go home at night and do something else. Some people just dont want to be managers or do anything beyond what they are currently doing it. Personally I get bored and I’m usually looking for something different. But there’s nothing wrong with people that want to do their job as is and be happy.
Like Tammy says, sometimes you need the person willing to work the line job and be content. But on the same token, if you interview a rock star that is ok working the line job for six months to get their feet wet, grab that person but make sure you have a plan for him/her.
January 14, 2010 at 10:49 am
Who chooses mediocrity for everything in their life? Very few if any.
Who chooses it for some things in their life? Pretty much everybody. Well, no, everybody.
For some people work isn’t that big a deal. Is it strange people would do something for at least a third of their day and not be excited about it? Yeah, but they have to pay the bills.
You don’t have to condone or not condone mediocrity. I agree with the sentiment that we simply have the job of determining where such a person would work and where they wouldn’t. Is every single position in your organization in need of a superman? You have toilets that need cleaning, right? Boxes to move, data to enter, documents to file, basic logistics that need directing.
I’m wondering how much of wanting everyone to be passionate about their job is just laziness on the part of the manager.
January 14, 2010 at 10:57 am
Unfortunately, in my line of my business, I get mediocre students whether I want them or not. I do not get to choose who will be the rock stars in my class. However, I am going to take Paul Hebert’s advice (http://www.i2i-align.com/2009/11/responding-to-a-challenge-this-one-goes-out-to-akabruno.html) and “ask each student to publically state what their grade goal is for the class.” If they are dedicated to get a “C” in the class and get by, I can adjust my efforts toward them accordingly
January 14, 2010 at 11:04 am
Do you choose mediocrity or is it choosing you? If you work for a mediocre company, in an industry that simply does not need excellence, you will have a mediocre job no matte what you do.
Unfortunately, some people “limit” their career because they are immigrants, have kids, cannot afford an education, etc. Or is this article about the lucky few who do not have these “problems”?
Finally, let’s face it: most of us are mediocre, but how many of us admit it? Then, how can you expect someone to come to an interview and say that (s)he is looking for mediocre career? (not to mention that recruiters expect you to be enthusiastic about any job – mediocre or not)
January 14, 2010 at 1:16 pm
Lance – Awesome Article – Glad someone did this post after yesterday…There are a lot of people who choose to be mediocre on a daily basis and are happy for it. They don’t have a passion for what they do, they don’t understand people like us and that is OK. While not everyone can be – there is definitely a place for B players in organizations – the challenge comes when recruiters hire and A for a B role or a B for and A role.
@Gabriel – I disagree with two of points made in your comment:
1. I believe in personal responsibility and accountability. Even if you work for a mediocre company in a mediocre industry you do NOT have to do a mediocre job.
2. Personal “limits” are really just excuses people make up for not wanting to be better. I am a 1st generation American, had kids way too young by most standards, grew up in foster care & with extended family so I had no one to pay for my education and you know what? I am not mediocre. People need to get over their “problems” and realize everyone has them – they just tackle them differently.
January 14, 2010 at 2:03 pm
Do you know how many people are not passionate about what they do? Most of them – in my opinion, it’s the rule, not the exception. Are they are not happy with it.
There are too many circumstances that can make you succeed or fail and you cannot control all of them. Just saying that someone who does not succeed did not have the ambition to do it is too simplistic.
I do not believe in fairy tales saying that if you really want something, you can do it! It is much more complicated than that and if you look around, you’ll realize that most people did not make it (just because you have a house, a car and cable TV doesn’t make you non-mediocre).
Finally, in case you wondered, i consider myself pretty successful, i am passionate about what i do, but i still think i’m mediocre.
November 2, 2010 at 6:28 pm
I really do agree with you and wanted to post this link to a YOuTube video I just watched today. Actually it was after watching that video that i google mediocre and came across this link.
Here is the video:
Enjoy!
January 14, 2010 at 11:28 am
Lance, I like the idea of you putting me in a position that tolerates mediocrity if I identify myself when I walk in the door. Here’s the problem: you (maybe not you but I daresay most HR managers) won’t hire me/will recommend against me being hired/will do everything to prevent me from being fired.
I believe that there are plenty of people who are content to do their job, do it well, but then go home. I also believe that companies need these people. No company, no matter what BS they put in their marketing materials, is staffed exclusively by rock stars. If the mediocre performers are competent then maybe the tradeoff works for both employer and employee. But HR, failing to “don’t believe the hype” believes that only Rock Stars should advance in the interview process and/or get hired.
Bottom line: there is no way in h-e-double hockey sticks that anyone will identify themselves as mediocre. They’ll get hired first and sort everything else out later. Especially in this economy.
January 14, 2010 at 11:29 am
Sorry, that should have been “hired” at the end of the first paragraph. Mediocrity in action!
January 14, 2010 at 11:30 am
I agree (to a point) with Gabriel. I believe most companies encourage mediocrity without necessarily being mediocre companies. I do not believe most people really want to be mediocre, most people would actually do a good job and perform well if given the opportunity.
Human performance is based on skills and motivation. I believe many people have skills, but in many cases those skills are not applied towards constructive work or applied in the wrong job. When that occurs, you have decreased motivation, and it shows in lower performance. Companies accept this because the organization itself does not know how to achieve higher performance.
Workers are not going to change the situation by their own effort. They do not realize they are “mediocre” as they have adapted to the expectations of the job and environment. I think it is emcumbent on companies to expect higher performance and to do so in constructive way with the appropriate methodology in place to either place people in jobs that match their skills or to train workers to meet the expectations of their jobs.
January 14, 2010 at 12:24 pm
This topic has generated a lot of discussion, and a lot of great comments, and I can’t say I’m shocked. One of the reasons why, IMO, is because of the ambiguity in defining what mediocre even is! To Lance’s point, there is no apples-to-apples comparison company to company, and a mediocre employee at one company could be a Rockstar at a competing firm. Anyway, here’s my perspective on this:
I think this is more about priorities then it is about performance. Some people are going to do their job effectively, even damn good, but won’t routinely go above and beyond, so that they can leave in time to make their kids bedtimes. I’m cool with that. Meanwhile, the single guy might still be in the office cranking out work until 10 pm because they don’t have to make that choice. You will see every combination in between here too – no stereotypes – it’s just that people makes choices about priorities in their lives.
Employers need to mentally separate those employees that can deliver, but have competing priorities from those that simply accept average performance as enough. Personally, I can handle the first, because I know they will step up when I need them. As for the second group, I don’t want them working for my company.
January 14, 2010 at 12:47 pm
Jason, I agree with you. Defining mediocrity is really the crux of it.
And sometimes its difficult to show managers that just because this guy clocks out on time, and the other guy stays still you kick him out, it doesn’t mean that one is better than the other.
Personally, I like the guy that goes home unless he needs to stay.
He’s managing his time, he’s balancing his life.
And I’m not paying him OT for standing around the water cooler.
I work very hard to coach my operators to see employees for their effort, not their hours, and gauge accordingly.
(noticing: gauging mediocrity somehow devolved into “level of effort” = “hours of face time” – i don’t like that at all.)
January 14, 2010 at 1:04 pm
Okay…. I’ll jump in.
A couple of comments mentioned “depends on definition of mediocre” – well here’s the dictionary.com definition:
1. of only ordinary or moderate quality; neither good nor bad; barely adequate.
2. rather poor or inferior.
But the Latin root is the middle height… in other words – sorry Lance – mediocre is a relative (read ranked) designation. You can’t be mediocre if you don’t rank people or performance. No ranking, no middle, no definition of mediocre.
But the question of whether people choose to be mediocre – I’d say no. But they can, and are, trained to provide mediocre work/performance. Managers enable and allow people to perform mediocre work – again – relative to the group.
The fact of the matter is that in ANY group you will have mediocre performers. The real question is do you have people who perform above the standards established for the job/function/role.
Mediocre is irrelevant. Above standards (and hopefully above a standard that continues to get higher) is the goal.
That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.
Pingback: Tweets that mention Sometimes Mediocrity Won’t Cut It | Rehaul by Lance Haun -- Topsy.com
Pingback: Tweets that mention Sometimes Mediocrity Won’t Cut It | Rehaul by Lance Haun -- Topsy.com
Pingback: Exit Interviews: Closing the Barn Door? « HRart
Pingback: Blogging Is Not Writing | Modite
August 5, 2010 at 7:47 pm
I see nothing wrong with an employee coming to work, doing the work that is assigned to him/her, then going home on time at the end of the day. After all, this is all the company is paying us for. It’s a trade-off, the employer is expected to pay me for 8 hours of work a day, and that all they are going to get out of me. I have been in the position of busting my butt working overtime trying to get everything done on time. Guess what…..it didn’t get me a big raise or a promotion. I decided then that it was foolish on my part to “give more than 100%” when they employer wasn’t willing to reward my hard work.
So all I am willing to do is show up on time, do the work that is assigned to me, and go home on time. That’s all you get paid to do, so why bother doing more. Work life is not the most important part of my life. There are things I enjoy doing more than working and I’m not going to sacrifice my ability to do those things just so I can work extra hard for an employer who doesn’t give a rats butt about me or my life outside of work.
Pingback: Why You Should Set Yourself on Fire | Transformational Leadership