Let’s fire some of our best performers!

It was another weekend. I called up the maintenance office and requested them to send staff to clean the washroom. After some-time, someone knocked on the door. I asked his name. He responded “Kashi”, went to the washroom and started doing the job. As usual, I got back to reading books. After 30 mins, I realised he had not come out. I enquired, and he told “Sir, 5 Minute aur”. [5 Mins more]

When he came out, he was drenched. I took a glance at the washroom. He had cleaned it nicely, except for the rod of the shower. I told him “Last time Shiva aaya tha, usne to rods ko bhi chamka Diya Tha. Tumse kyon nahi hua? He told me “Sir aap bolo to main bhi chamka dunga, lekin agar acid use kiya to uska asar bura parta hai rod par”. I was shocked to hear that. I paid him some extra bucks and bid goodbye to him. 

After he left, I started thinking about this interaction. I was unable to digest that this guy spent 10 mins extra to clean the washroom vis a vis Shiva who came last time. Even after knowing that using acid for cleaning the rod would have improved the overall performance with less effort, he chose not to. Rather he worked hard and accomplished his job.

It forced me to think, Why would someone do that? Why would someone put extra effort to achieve the sub-optimal results? He was not dumb, I must say. Perhaps, its because the value system his parents have instilled in him. Perhaps he values the long term trust-building over short term quick gains. Post this interaction, whenever I call maintenance office, I do not forget to add, “Please send Kashi, if possible”. And he gets extra bucks for that job. He has made me his loyal customer. 

This is prevalent in all walks of life. We meet a lot of people who can go to any extent to meet their objectives without caring about its implications. They politely win over you. You start liking them. And slowly they will put you in danger and quietly leave.

On the other hand, we have a lot of people, who are dedicated to their work. Sometimes they miss deadlines. Sometimes their outputs are sub-optimal. Sometimes they refuse to do what you say, just because that is harmful to the ecosystem. And slowly and unknowingly we start hating them. But those are the people who will stand with you when you are in danger. 

I don’t know how to differentiate these people. How to identify them? It’s really complicated to categorise them. However, we can follow this to start with. 

• If someone has overachieved in his/her task, we can take pause and analyse critically. Can we check if he has actually devoted time to achieve that? Can we get feedback from team members to understand the overall value system of this performer?

• Or If someone has underachieved, then also, we take a pause to understand his/her perspective, without tagging him/her as an underperformed. Can we check if he was really stuck in processes beyond his area of influence? or is he is getting politically manipulated by someone else?

or We can also follow this framework: I have just devised this 🙂 

Segmentation of Performers – Who put in a lot of effort to achieve the outcome

• Over Performer: They put in a lot of efforts into work and achieves proportionate results. They are the go-to man for any organisation. 

• Trust-worthy Performer: They also put in a lot of effort but also keep an eye on overall stability. They would not do anything in the area which comes under the blind eye of management, even after knowing that it might give him leverage. They are the most trusted lot in the organisation. Kashi falls under this category.

• Under Performer: They put in a lot of efforts but unable to achieve results. Perhaps they are in the wrong place. They can be put under the PIP (Performance Improvement Program). Even after this, if their performance does not improve, they can become a candidate, who could be transferred to another department.

Segmentation of Performers – Who put in a less effort to achieve the outcome

• Amateur Performer: They are lazy ones. They do not put in efforts. Obviously, they don’t achieve any results. Counselling is needed for such employees. Post this counselling, some of them may graduate to Smart performer, Over performer or Underperformer. And accordingly, they can be managed.

• Smart Performer: They are the smartest folks in the organisation. They know how to optimise the process and get the desired world-class output by putting relatively fewer efforts. They don’t need much management support. They may gel well with the team members. Some of them may be helpful also. In my opinion, they are the as worthy asset as a trustworthy performer. Management just needs to fulfil their wishes.

• Dangerous Performer: They are smart (no doubt) but unfortunately they put in maximum efforts in managing higher management. Somehow they are able to showcase the world-class output to management by putting very little own efforts but largely by stealing credits of others, manipulating the team members and gaming the system. Most of the time, management fails to identify these viruses and start treating them as smart performers. If these people stay in the organisation for long, then the organisation will not last for long.  Just like coronavirus, they will infect everyone. As soon as, we identify such employees, they should be fired immediately irrespective of their position.

Tips to Identify Dangerous/Toxic Performers (More or less both are same)

Smart Performer v/s Dangerous Performer

These super performers showcase maximum results to the management. They may be the most talented folks in the company and management generally have a soft corner for them. Smart performer and dangerous performer both fall under this category.

However, there is a subtle difference between the two. Smart performers are genuine performers but dangerous performers are fake performers (in those scheme of things). Smart performers are good for the company both for short and long term but dangerous performers are good for only in the short term.

Also, If someone does only politics and unable to produce quality output then anyway he/she will be exposed in 1-2 quarters. But dangerous performers are able to stay for long undetected, as they keep producing results by hook or crook.

As explained by Simon Sinek, we have millions of parameter to evaluate performance but just one parameter to evaluate trust (given in the above clip). As dangerous performers are able to meet the standard of those performance metrics, they qualify themselves as performers. That’s why, management should perform that one check of trust for all employees especially high performers more often.

Expectation Management

It would be also interesting to see how the reward system is adapted based on this insight. In the current scheme of things, everyone gets their proportionate rewards except for two categories.

First, the dangerous performer gets more than what he/she deserves. He/She is somehow able to project the achievements of others as his/her own and gets accolades. They are expert at gaming the system. Firing them at the earliest will save the company in the long run.

Second, the trustworthy performer gets less than what he/she deserves. These selfless warriors generally die in the process. (Some of the relevant details here). Kashi’s of the world are a rare breed. They must be handled with love and care. Identifying and nurturing them will save the organisation in the long run.

Disclaimer: This was my thought process. I may be correct or incorrect I don’t know, but following this analysis, we may be in a position to categorize few people. Would love to hear your thoughts and suggestion.

Enjoy the video. A really good way to identify PTS (Potential Trouble Source) and SP (Suppressive Person).

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9_EHU5BKnQ

References

India’s Most Fearless 2: More Military Stories of Unimaginable Courage and Sacrifice