If you were to have to hire between these two people...

[TravelingGal]

Which would you choose, assuming both were honest people?

A decent worker with a great, positive attitude.

A great worker, who tended to bitch (and bitch and bitch) about the injustices of the company.

 

[Haven]

What's the position? Will they be managing any other employees?

ETA: Will this employee have an office of her own? Will it have a door that closes? Or will she be around other people during the workday?

 

[Hera]

A decent worker with a great, positive attitude. The great worker will bring everyone else down from all of their negativity.

 

[TravelingGal]

Haven, any position, and no, not managing anyone.

 

[monarch64]

Positive attitude takes precedence over bitching and moaning every time, in my book.

 

[TravelingGal]

Oh, and I'd be interested in knowing if it would make a difference if it were a man vs a woman.

 

[decodelighted]

Damn. I just realized I'm *never* getting hired again. *sigh*

 

[TravelingGal]

Haven, around other people, not in a office, but if it makes a difference to you, I'm in interested in knowing why.

 

[Maisie]

Positive attitude for me. I wouldn't like to be around negativity every single day.

 

[monarch64]

It really would not make a difference to me if it were a man or a woman. I've worked with, and managed, both types in both genders and the negative personality type just isn't as productive in any way as compared with the positive type. Too much energy wasted on bitching and moaning instead of DOING THE JOB.

 

[mrscushion]

Attitude wins. No difference between man or woman.

 

[lyra]

With a positive attitude already, perhaps the good worker could become a great worker. It would be a positive thing. Trying to get the great worker to be uber great sounds like a greater challenge. It also depends on the position of course. If it is sales and is all about the bottom line, maybe the great worker is better and you just have to ignore the negativity.

 

[TravelingGal]

With a positive attitude already, perhaps the good worker could become a great worker. It would be a positive thing. Trying to get the great worker to be uber great sounds like a greater challenge. It also depends on the position of course. If it is sales and is all about the bottom line, maybe the great worker is better and you just have to ignore the negativity.

That's a great point...hard for a person to improve themselves if their attitude prevents them from doing so.

 

[kama_s]

Eventually, negativity WILL bring down the performance of the great worker. S/He will become more and more resentful and less and less productive.

So, I definitely choose decent with positive attitude.

 

[Haven]

I've never met a malcontent who was *actually* a great worker. They may have the potential, but malcontents just bring everyone else down. SO, I'd probably hire the decent worker with a great, positive attitude. It seems like there's more potential for growth, there. A negative attitude can be like a bad virus if the person is vocal about it.

My answer doesn't change based on the gender of the employee.

As to why it matters if she has her own office or not, I care about that depending on the type of job she's being hired to do. If it was a job that required specialized skills and experience, AND if there were high stakes connected to her success on the job, I might consider the malcontent if she was going to be in an office all by herself up at the top of a turret or something. (I say turret because I actually know someone who worked in "the tip of a turret" as she said. That's a good place for a Negative Nelly.)

When I say high stakes connected to her success, I'm thinking about a position that directly affects something that *I* consider to be important. If the position was for a grant writer whose success in securing grants meant the success or demise of a research group that was very close to finding a cure for multiple myeloma, for example, then I want the person who is best qualified and most able to do the work, malcontent or not. Especially if we're going to stick her in the tip of a turret.

(And just in case people start drawing their own conclusions: My use of female pronouns is simply a choice to be grammatically correct, and not a commentary on which gender I believe to be more likely to be a malcontent at work. I could have just as easily used male pronouns, but that's just not my style. )

 

[Lilac]

Definitely decent worker with great, positive attitude.

 

[marcy]

The one with a positive attitude.

 

[decodelighted]

Seriously, it depends on the type of job. Being *highly discerning* & able to detect problems & have a broad, out-of-the-box view is a valuable skill. I think there should be ONE of "those types" on every team. Constant complaining is an *action* that can be changed somewhat. And I know many folks like that (my husband included) who have mellowed with age and experience. Once they realize EVERYWHERE sucks the "injustices" seem less, um, unjust?

If its more of a "Debbie Downer" situation ... where the person is likely to *contaminate* others & not willing to curb the *behavior* of complaining, then I might go with the Able/Positive person vs. the Talented/Neggy.

 

[aliciagirl]

For me it would depend entirely on what role they would have in the company.

We deal with people all day, so being upbeat and positive is a HUGE part of the job and could outweigh most things for most employees. For a fellow pharmacist, I'd take someone who is disgruntled about the company, though. Quality outweighs personality for me on that one - it doesn't matter if you do it with smile, if you make a mistake that can cost someone their life.

Of course when I hear decent/great worker the first thing that comes to mind is how well they do their job, not necessarily how hard they are working. In which case I may have a different answer.

 

[zoebartlett]

I'd rather hire a decent coworker with a positive attitude. The way I see it is that a decent coworker can improve to become great, but the positive attitude probably comes more naturally to some people. I'd rather have someone work hard to be great while having a really good way of looking at life, job responsibilites, etc. Hope that make sense...

ETA: Listening to a coworker constantly whine and complain is very draining, and that would get old really fast. I'd have far less patience with someone like that. Sure, a good b!tch session is fine once in a while. Everyone needs to vent to some degree. But if that's all the person is doing, I'd think twice about spending so much time with that person.

 

[TravelingGal]

Interesting responses everyone!

Generally, I'd pick happy/decent every time. In fact, that was my answer when I started this thread. But then I got to thinking, in my case, what decent means.

I've had decent/happy employees before. They do what's needed of them, but generally don't have initiative. Instead of coming to me and saying, here is the issue, here are two possible solutions and I think this one might work better, what do you think? They'll just say, "here's the problem." They are great on the phone, but may not return calls in a timely manner. Etc, etc.

If bad attitude meant sarcastic, I might be able to deal with that. Haven, I thought about what you said at first...that generally malcontents aren't great at their job. But thinking about to some of the people I've worked with, I've met a couple who are really amazing at what they do...they just are very sarcastic while doing it. I actually didn't mind those people because they were a funny-sarcastic. But it could get old after awhile.

I do think a great attitude is important and that generally working habits can improve if the attitude means that person is also good at taking constructive criticism.

 

[Haven]

Ooh, there's a big difference between someone who is sarcastic, and someone who is a malcontent. Many of my former colleagues were very sarcastic, a few of them were malcontents, and some were both.

I'll take sarcasm any day, and have no problem working with people who are sarcastic. Malcontents, however, are a chore and a drain.

 

[TravelingGal]

Seriously, it depends on the type of job. Being *highly discerning* & able to detect problems & have a broad, out-of-the-box view is a valuable skill. I think there should be ONE of "those types" on every team. Constant complaining is an *action* that can be changed somewhat. And I know many folks like that (my husband included) who have mellowed with age and experience. Once they realize EVERYWHERE sucks the "injustices" seem less, um, unjust?

If its more of a "Debbie Downer" situation ... where the person is likely to *contaminate* others & not willing to curb the *behavior* of complaining, then I might go with the Able/Positive person vs. the Talented/Neggy.

Deco, I deal with this with TGuy all the time. He is a wonderful person...high integrity, great work ethic, but also extremely black and white in the way he sees the world. A conversation between us might go something like this.

TGuy: [complain complain complain about X]. It shouldn't be like that!

TGal: But it is, honey.

TGuy: But it shouldn't be, right? Are you saying that you'd just sit back and accept it?

TGal: No, but I wouldn't get my panties in a bunch over it. Whether or not you feel it should be differently, it simply isn't.

TGuy: But it SHOULDN'T be.

TGal: But it IS. I find a way to deal with it and stay happy and balanced.

TGuy: Then you're selling out.

TGal: Maybe.

TGuy: Well, I can't be like that.

TGal: Understood. You're only kiling yourself. Can we call that life insurance company now?

 

[zoebartlett]

Yeah, I can deal with sarcasm better than I can deal with...uh, malcontentness. Is that a word?

 

[TravelingGal]

Yeah, I can deal with sarcasm better than I can deal with...uh, malecontentness. Is that a word?

When one has malecontentness about her man, that's a good thing.

 

[Haven]

I guess for me it boils down to this:

I'll take the acerbic wit in a cubicle, the malcontent in the tip of a turret, and you can put Ms. Happypants anywhere you like.

 

[zoebartlett]

Yeah, I can deal with sarcasm better than I can deal with...uh, malecontentness. Is that a word?

When one has malecontentness about her man, that's a good thing.

Damn, you caught it before I edited the spelling! But yes, I agree...

 

[jas]

I guess for me it boils down to this:

I'll take the acerbic wit in a cubicle, the malcontent in the tip of a turret, and you can put Ms. Happypants anywhere you like.

Putting Ms. Happypants in certain places would ensure a lot of malecontents.

Yes, I'm pretty sure a lot of people would love to stick me in a turret

 

[decodelighted]

Where can I purchase these Happypants (tm)? Do they come in plus sizes? Will they make my butt look big(ger)?*


*see, I already have concerns.

 

[brazen_irish_hussy]

It is hard for me to say. I have someone at work who is very negative and makes me crazy, but everyone avoids him and that seems to work fine. Depending on the job, I would likely take the unhappy one. Most of the jobs I have left were do to my being unhappy with the company or the way I was treated but I was very good at the jobs and did not bring that with me to the next job.

Once I become an archaeologist, I would totally take the malcontent. Most of the greats in the field are real jerks by all accounts, but they get the best students, the best digs/collections and by far the most money for a department or group. That last one alone is enough to be honest. Finally, I want to be putting my name on/being associated with someone who is doing the best work possible. One of the most famous and talented members of my sub field who I will not name, would not care how good my work as long as my shirt were low cut and I fed his ego, but I would hire him in a heartbeat over someone really nice and only competent.