[otto_sf]

Being an A or B player isn't something that happens at birth. Your performance at work depends on a lot of factors.

But there are B players out there, and A players are doing better work than them. This is irrefutable if you've ever worked on a team of significant size. It's not supposed to be some personality-damning attribute that implies a B player is forever doomed, or always brings less utility to the table than an A player. It is specific to their current role, work, etc.

[calinet6]

"But there are B players out there, and A players are doing better work than them."

Yes, but it turns out the correct question is why, not who.

When you ask why, you find out how to make everyone succeed. When you ask who, you get a slew of negative cultural consequences.

[otto_sf]

No. There is no correct question. There are a ton of factors involved in an individual's performance, some of which are personal, some are organizational, some are circumstantial.

Don't oversimplify it. Asking why does not allow you to find out how to make everyone succeed. It might help. It might not. But in general, I don't put much stock in notions of everybody succeeding. That's rhetoric, not real world.

[jacquesm]

It is true that not everybody can be brought to succeed in every environment, but I think that's exactly what the article tries to convey. That if you feel that you are surrounded by 'B' players that the problem does not lie with the players but with the way the game is played.

And that is fixable. Adapting the game to the players will go a very long way to making 'B' players perform better, in some cases by relocating them to different roles or maybe sending them out to training.

Trying to ram square pegs through round holes will not work, that's the way to create 'B' players. And a very large amount of this is the result of poor hiring practices, hiring people that do not fit their roles or the corporate culture or the level of management they need (vs the degree of independence they crave).

Fitting the company to the people isn't always possible, we usually don't run armies where piles of conscripts ('soldiers') are being run through the mill to see who can be promoted to a role of more responsibility.

So oversimplifying it definitely is not the road, but simply saying person 'x' is a 'B' player and is beyond help is probably not the truth either.

[calinet6]

In 99% of cases, the problem is not with the people within a company, but with the motivational, management, and work systems which surround them. That is the point.

It is important to realize subtleties in how people operate, but it's more important to realize that most problems are attributable to the system and not the individuals.

Critically important, in fact. That's why it's the right way to look at the problem.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W._Edwards_Deming

[yellow_and_gray]

You are right that it doesn't guarantee it, but it does allow it. Do you see the distinction?

You could have caught yourself when you said there is no correct question. Given enough questions, some are correct. And if why isn't one of the first questions to ask about anything, if not the most important one, what would you say are some useful questions to ask?

Also, you not putting much stock in notions of everybody succeeding is a statement about you, not about everybody. You don't have to want everybody to succeed obviously, but I can't imagine you not wanting anyone to succeed either. Perhaps you are ok with only some people succeeding. Like close family and friends, for example. It doesn't have to be everyone.

[neilellis]

I agree.

I would say we all can be A or B players depending on a huge mixture of psychological factors including what people think of us, what we think of ourselves, what we think of the job we do ... and countless more.

If someone's company is full of 'B players' in reality they're saying their company is full of under motivated people. Why they are under motivated is a different matter and can be a complex affair usually combining internal and external factors.