4 ms·
Another way of thinking about this is: don't take a job where your compensation is tied to a finite metric. E.g. jobs that are paid by the hour, or based on ho
by dpapathanasiou 19y ago
Another way of thinking about this is: don't take a job where your compensation is tied to a finite metric.
E.g. jobs that are paid by the hour, or based on how many units of something you produce.
- Retric 19y agoThat is not really accurate. High skill jobs with finite metric's can pay well because it's easy to find your worth. EX: A sales guy for a consulting firm that brings in 100 million a year in business can make a few million a year. However a low skilled sales guy at the local Fry's is limited in how much he can bring in. The real trick is to find a <B>highly valuable</B> skill with finite metric's where you can be unusually productive. One of the best examples of this is Linemen in football vs. running backs. It's hard to demonstrate the difference between the best 99.99% and the 99.98% Linemen, but if you average .2 extra yards per play as a running back you can and will get payed for that. PS: At some point it all comes back to basic economics. Find something in limited supply that people want and you will get payed for it.
- dpapathanasiou 19y agoThe guy at Fry's is a hourly wage worker, despite his title. But the salesman who can convince Fortune 500 firms to spend millions on software licenses is an example of the type of person I was talking about, because there are no limits placed on him as to how much revenue he may bring in. Also, not sure your if football example makes sense: if what you say about linemen is true, why do some get drafted in the first round?