The Case of the Toxic High Performer

We're reluctant to let our high performers go because they are, well, high performers. But what do we really mean when we talk about the 'value' of a high performer? The numbers that they bring in? The cost of replacing them? What they add to the organisation in total?

Some years ago, I met a very talented high performing manager who was on the verge of being promoted to a very senior role. He drove sales aggressively and his team never missed a target. Other than his drive for results, he was very articulate and persuasive. He made promises on results and always delivered. Naturally, with the focus on results, he was regarded very favourably in the organisation.

Against the background of consistent results, he frequently challenged the quality of support that he and his team received from other (what he considered) 'support functions' and demanded better from them. His case for demanding more or better support was always made logically and rationally - and he received the support of leadership for this.

A pattern began to emerge. He picked fights with most of his peers but always proved his case with facts and figures. No one could out-debate him and after a while, people stopped trying to because he was so articulate.

He held absolute control over his team and demanded complete loyalty from them. Because of his control, the relationship between his team members and their peers across other functions continued to deteriorate - but he continued to produce the results.

Then another curious pattern emerged: his direct reports would sometimes pass on compliments about their colleagues. During any cross-functional meeting though, if there was an opportunity for them to repeat the compliment in his presence, they kept silent. Still, the results continued to come in and his team continued to produce at the continued expense of strained relationships with their colleagues. He fought tooth and nail on behalf of his team, made a good case and always won. The perception throughout the organisation (whether true or not) was that he and his function received preferential treatment because of their results.

This case made a very strong argument for how performance should be measured.

If you were either a peer or the manager of such a colleague, what would you do?

Pete Pereira and Helen Langhammer designed the Cross-Functional Feedback Inventory to facilitate and resolve conflict between functions. To learn more about it, drop an enquiry to [email protected] or [email protected]