MGMT Minute: How To Handle A High Performer Who Is Terrible to Work With

Read time: 1 minute

In the Q&A following Tuesday's MGMT Accelerator, we got a question:

"I have an engineer in the top 1% for technical output and the bottom 1% for behavior. What do I do?"

The chat box exploded:

• "He's got to go!"

• "Sounds toxic.

• "Fire fast."

And while these sentiments may prove correct, I wanted to know more.

Here are my questions and why I asked each one.

Is this person toxic or difficult?

Toxic is an overused phrase.

In 20+ years, I've encountered perhaps five truly toxic individuals. Toxic employees tend to be higher performers (firing them would be easy if they weren't). They tend to manage up deftly (which shields them from scrutiny). They tend to manipulate, abuse, and deceive their colleagues.

If the person is toxic, you should act swiftly to remove them. No amount of output will offset their corrosive effects on your team. And your psyche.

Difficult is more nuanced. People who think differently can be difficult. People willing to speak truth to power can be difficult. People who lean heavily introverted and private can also be perceived by others as difficult.

Michael Jordan was notoriously difficult.
Steve Jobs and Elon Musk seem to be no picnic either.
And how about Jeff Bezos:

But diverse experiences and thinking can make teams more creative and resilient. Having someone who demands a lot of themselves and others can be an asset on your team if you can finesse positive outcomes.

Sometimes difficult is a difficulty worth getting your team through.

Do you know their ambitions? What motivates them?

If I want someone on my team to change, I need to align that change to something they want.

For example, early in my career, I had developed a reputation as an arrogant jerk. I was convinced my job was to hold impossibly high standards, drive the team relentlessly, and provide exacting direction.

I started working with a coach who showed me why this behavior created a ceiling for my career. I was willing to do the hard work required to change because I wanted to lead bigger, more impactful teams.

There are few things more humbling than going to a dozen people who think you're an a$$hole and asking them how they think you should change.

And if I didn't want what was on the other side of that change, it never would have happened.

Being topped out this early in my career was more painful than doing the work to change.

When:

Pain of Current State >> Pain of Future State

That's when change happens.
And it can change quickly.

But no one can want it for us.

Does this person's work require collaboration?

Is being easy to work with an asset? Absolutely.

But not everyone cares.

I’ve seen people like this who can produce output at multiples of their peers.

And that doesn't always come with being like (or liked by) their peers.

While not always possible, you can sometimes adjust the design to maximize their output and minimize damage.

I've seen technical experts paired with competent managers. And simply removing the people management burden allowed them to thrive (and become instantly more enjoyable to work with).

I've also seen "mad scientists" permitted to work in their lab independently from others, their output carefully harnessed while their former team goes un-harassed.

Be careful. You’ll feel like you’re creating a double standard because you are.

Managing this takes courage and conviction.

It cannot be done quietly.

***

As leaders, if we want uncommon results, we need to question common wisdom.

Fire fast is common wisdom. But difficult doesn’t always mean destructive.

Seek to understand your difficult high performers.

And you might just turn friction into unstoppable forward progress.

Lead on,
Dave & Mar

💡New Managers: MGMT Fundamentals is open for enrollment. In an hour a day over two weeks, we’ll teach you the foundational skills to not just survive but thrive in your new leadership role. Ideal for managers in the first 3 years leading a team.