WANTED! Top Performers Only

Should businesses create "fewer, more significant jobs?" Absolutely. From the standpoint of good business sense, employing people that train hard and work harder will make the company more successful in the long run. Let's face it, if you have an employee that cannot pull their weight in the workplace, not only are they hurting productivity and sales, they also hurt morale. An interesting fact I found in, “End ‘equal treatment’ today! Focus on top performers;” in companies Human Resource departments, professionals spend “little to no time with top performers identifying barriers to their productivity or what factors motivate and retain them.” So, does this mean that if a company had only top performers and the riff-raff was escorted out the door, companies could save money on training programs such as Ethics, Violence in the Workplace, etc and focus more on company business than personnel issues?
When a person does not care about their position in a company and the company itself, it shows in their job performance. Therefore, a person eager and willing to learn and uses this knowledge to better their performance and those around them are more beneficial to the company than someone who considers it “just a job.” Although employers might have to pay these high performers more money, in the long run they will come out ahead due to increased customer satisfaction and increased work output. Employers can take the money they would pay non-performers and put it toward employees of “value.”

http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/3405.html

http://www.humanresourcesmagazine.com.au/articles/0f/0c020e0f.asp