LogFAQs > #971668193

I'm a manager and I need an assistant. There's two people I'm considering:

• Guy #1: This is the person everyone wants me to promote. He's very good at his job, has perfect metrics, never missed a day of work, always willing to do overtime, pretty much has dedicated his life to this job. However, being good at your job doesn't mean you would be good in management. He's a "yes man", he doesn't understand the hierarchy of the company or what management goes through (he only understands his own job), and he follows any orders without question. None of those are necessarily bad things, but I don't really see any management potential in him. He knows the job inside and out, and he's reliable, but that doesn't mean he would be a good manager.
• Guy #2: This person doesn't apply himself that much, but I see a LOT of management potential in him. He calls off on occasion, he sometimes argues with me and others in management, he's been written up a few times, and tbh he's really not all that great at the job. So why am I considering him? He's VERY intelligent, and he has management written all over him. He's not afraid to speak up if something is wrong, he understands what a manager is supposed to do, he has a great understanding of the hierarchy of the company. He understands that managers have metrics they have to make as well. Basically he understands more than just his own role. Although him being a pain in the ass is bad, it shows he has the balls to be a manager. He may not be that good at the job, but I think he would be an effective manager. You don't need to be good at the job in order to be a good manager.

I know my subordinates are going to be pissed when I promote guy #2 rather than guy #1, and I'm going to hear complaints like "guy #1 is such a good employee, why didn't get get the promotion" and I'm going to facepalm. But maybe I'm missing omething here. What do you guys think? Who would you promote if you were in my situation?