Smart Worker vs. Hard Worker

I've had this discussion with friends before, and I was recently thinking about it this week due to some things one of my professors said. He's mentioned, several times now, that he would hire a D average student who is a very hard worker and struggles to get that D grade before he would hire someone who is an A student, who doesn't have to try quite as hard. So he would pick someone who works hard at not succeeding over someone who is naturally good at whatever it is they're trying to accomplish? It both makes sense, and is also incredibly mind-boggling.

What many people don't take into consideration when pondering this dilemma is that people are different. Sometimes a person will struggle to accomplish a task that someone else finds to be simple. Does that make them better or worse? It depends on the attitude of both people. I have friends who are insane when it comes to studying, and will completely freak out for a test and study for a crazy amount of hours and then end up getting a decent grade. These people do work hard and if that ethic is applied to their jobs then they would be good employees. Once they get the hang of things, they can be counted on to continue doing good work.

However, I also know people who say they stayed up studying all night, and worked so hard, and why oh why did they still get such a bad grade! It's because they're frequently lying. Yes, they might have had their books out near them all night, but chances are they procrastinated like hell and would get distracted by Facebook or Cracked.com. These would be the people who come home after work and talk about how stressful their job is and why does it seem like nothing ever gets done, but really they just don't like doing work and really like complaining.

Then there are the naturally talented people. Let's first look at the ones who may not have to work as hard as other people, but do still work. The people who can review for a quiz a few minutes before class and get at least a 90. Does this mean that these people are slackers? Umm...no. If they don't need to stay up studying all night, then why the hell should they? And just because they are good at something doesn't mean when it gets time to enter the work force they're going to be lazy. They can still work hard, do a good job, and take pride in their work. They can still be the employee that shows up early for work, and doesn't mess around while there.

But they can very easily be the person who knows that they're good at what they do, and assumes everyone else is an idiot. These people tend to think most jobs are a joke. They'll show up late, play around online, and try to leave early. They're obviously intelligent people, but they can still be idiotic at being a good worker.

And of course, let's not forget all of the degrees of personality in between these examples, as well as not forgetting the B and C students.

So where does this all leave me in the great debate? Well, I'm not one to just pick a side because there are always variables to consider. If I were an employer, I would just have to trust my instinct. I wouldn't choose the D student over the A student, or vice versa. I would pick whichever one I thought best exemplifies the position and has the better attitude and resume. I just think definitive statements such as the ones my professor made are too harsh. Why not give the A student a chance too? They might be an amazing worker, who conveniently won't need as much training.