Experience Vs Flexibility

Experience Vs Flexibility

  • Experience

    Votes: 4 33.3%
  • Flexibility

    Votes: 8 66.7%

  • Total voters
Two types of people I work with.
The experienced guy who has more qualifications and experience than anyone else in his chosen profession. Yet as soon as something does not go his way or hes thrown a fast ball(happens alot) to get done yesterday, he snaps and throws all his bears, crayons and toys well and truly out of the pram. Sits in the corner or stomps around the office sulking like a big girl. A top bloke provided things stay on an even keel.

The flexible guy:What he lacks in qualifications and experience, is made up by a cheeky grin and a "can do" attitude. Fecks up only due to his lack of experience. Calls his boss a "cheeky tommy tanker" (given and taken in jest)as he gets given another fast ball. Runs away giggling like a girl to get the job done smart as carrots.

Ones going, ones staying

Your call

Flexibility wins over experience as the chap with the flexibility will get the experience.
Which one is more productive?
The experienced guy, but not by much. Although he does have some high rolling contacts, after 6-8 months of meetings nothing has come to fruition.

Difficult decision, the flexible guy does things a bit gung ho, the experienced guy does them right. Mr Flexible does not know why Mr Experience does things the way he does.

Do you want a flexible or experienced doctor for example. It all boils down to the consequences of a feck up.
I've had a lot of bad experience with guys who have 'cheeky grins and can do attitudes'. They generally wind up the type who legs it from one job to the next before the pressure of shit forces the lid they've been keeping it hidden under.

The experienced guy sounds like he has an attitude problem but that doesn't mean he's wrong about things. Maybe his experience is telling him there's ways to avoid being fastballed so often but nobody's listening? If so, I know exactly how he feels.
We deal with, on and around all kinds of ships. If the boat fails to tell you until last minute when its coming in then it is extremely difficult to plan for that kind of work. Example;
Boat: We need X, Y, and Z doing onboard but we'll only be alongside for 12 hours.
US: OK, when do get in?
Boat: We came in four hours ago!
Flexible bloke: OK Ill do what I can, with what I can. No promises.
Experienced: fecking schitt arrse. Need more time.

Its kind of like this as well
Given a short period of time the flexible guy will do the impossible , while the experienced guy flaps and achieves less than the flexible. Yet given more time, the experienced guy will pull of miracles that otherwise looked impossible. That just leaves the flexible guy looking like a dumb ass, a slightly wiser dumb ass at that.

Neither of the blokes are stupid, far from it. Both have drive and commitment. Both have different ways of achieving the end result. We need both, but only one can stay.

I think it is quite cute, given the RAF in post for years versus Int Corps change jobs every 2 discussion going on elsewhere, that the "flexibility" bar, currently at 100% of the votes, is light blue. Ironic as well ...
thought this was a sex question. anyway...experience.
After a while the flexible guy will become an experienced, flexible guy and probably start taking his morning stroll on the lake. How long do you think you're keeping either one?
Jobs are limited in this given field, and one is going sooner than he thinks.
Well, the more flexible girl will allow you to be more creative, but the more experienced one will definately provide a more rewarding experience for you. The same I would imagine applies to men but I have no experience with them.
The experienced guy is snowed under doing the flexible guy's work ?

Electrical contracting. Three electricians churn out more work than two electricians with two semi skilled mates.

What would John Harvey Jones do ? Go down the chain and first ask the guys actually performing the miracles.
Keep both, and sack the "cheeky tommy tanker" of a manager who keeps setting them both up to fail by giving them impossible jobs.

I'll bet that saves more of the salary budget than sacking either of them, so they can both have a pay rise.

All the best,

Keep both, and sack the "cheeky tommy tanker" of a manager who keeps setting them both up to fail by giving them impossible jobs.

I'll bet that saves more of the salary budget than sacking either of them, so they can both have a pay rise.

All the best,

That is probably the best plan. The experienced guy could even be promoted so that he does the planning work that the manager should have been doing; that way, when the curve-ball comes in, if he didn't have a contingency for it, it would be his own fault, and he would only have himself to blame.
Time to start job-hunting SKJOLD.

Boat: We need X, Y, and Z doing onboard but we'll only be alongside for 12 hours.


Experienced: fecking schitt arrse. Need more time.


It sounds like the experienced guy feels he's under pressure to do everything that's being asked of him rather than the best he can in the time given.

Sometimes, the customer isn't right. Sometimes the customer is an arrse. Has anyone pointed out to the experienced guy that it's ok not to work miracles every time?
I'd say experience isn't really a factor here.

I see it that you got those with a can do attitude that muddle through. Result is; things aren't done by the book, as such sometimes works, sometimes it doesn't. Works extremely well in small teams; makes them ultra dynamic. Paper work will probably be non-existant. I'll be honest, this is how I like working, it gets things done.

What you are calling the experienced guy, I'd call a "Jobsworth"; although that is unfair to them. It is the corporate drone mentaility; and that's where it shines. Large organisations need to know / track what is going on. It means you get 100% consistancy. That can either be a high or low quality result.

It really comes down to the role. You want to produce one off's, then the dynamic approach is best. You want a production line, then then more static approach is best.

Wasn't that the whole point of the orders process review after the second world war? To reduce the lion's lead by donkey's. Rather than the order "hold that hill", you get told "hold that hill, because you boss wants to be able to cover that bridge which is a choke point". It allows and encourages initiative. As such when you rock up at the hill and realise you can't see that bridge, you get to decide what to do next.
Both guys have been given a gypsies warning. Partnered together and told in no uncertain terms,
" Learn from each other, increase my profits or feck off ". They've been given 6 months. Luckily both respect each professionalism and get on quite well.


Similar threads

Latest Threads