How to deal with erring star performers?

Gyanendra Kumar Kashyap

Star performers are the ones who surpass goals more often than not, are technically superior, are quick to grasp new organisational missions and have risen through the ranks by producing exemplary results.  However, a few of them have bad attitude, which if left unchecked can destroy the organisational culture and team. How do we handle such performers without losing them?

Yes, Gautam Gambhir and Virat Kohli besides being captains for their respective franchisee teams, Kolkata Knight Riders and Royal Challengers Bangalore, are undoubtedly star performers for their teams. While star performers prove to be an asset to the organisation, but like most superheroes, star performers too have a dark side and at times with their behaviour and attitude cause a problem. The 12 April, 2013 verbal duel that the two star cricketers engaged themselves in does raise a question or two about how to manage such star performers. The two players in question are highly talented and fiercely competitive; however the entire episode paints a picture that the two insisted on having their own way often contemptuous of others.

Cut the picture to an organisation, there are numerous examples of star performers who are arrogant, demand special treatment and absolutely no one wants to work with this individual. The failure to deal with such individuals or allowing them to have a free run, does have a negative impact on the cultural fabric of the organisation besides undermining the performance of the entire team in the long term.

Besides raising an ethical question, as such disruptive behaviour by star performers if left unchecked can run counter to the organisational values, the key question is - how should organisation deal with such star performers? Should the organisation retain the employee just on account of performance or should it take necessary measures to change the behaviour of such star performers? Those in the know argue that in both the cases, there is the probability of a backfire and the organisation can face the risk of losing their star performer. According to Peter Cappelli, Professor of Management at The Wharton School, the trade-off between talent and disruptive behavior depends on how important teamwork and morale are in the organization's culture.

Coming back to the above question, Tiziana Casciaro and Miguel Sousa Lobo – authors of the Harvard Business School study “Competent Jerks, Lovable Fools, and the Formation of Social Networks” contend most employees would rather work with someone less competent because that person may be more pleasant, more open to other’s ideas and more willing to share their own. They may even be perceived as more trustworthy. What if the organisation decides to change the behaviour – how should the organisation go about? A few suggestions (not exhaustive to say the least):

Hold the star performer accountable for performance as well as behaviour: Not holding employees accountable for their behaviour just because they perform well makes the company’s values meaningless.

Adopt a team based performance recognition system: Sometimes star performers walk away with all the credit for a job done well without acknowledging the contribution of others in the team. The star performers need to be gently reminded of the benefits of sharing credit when it is due. This will improve their relations with others in the team and also gain them their respect and admiration.

Focus on interpersonal skills: The star performers should be made to realise that developing interpersonal skills holds the key to good leadership qualities, which is needed along with technical expertise to reach the top.

Regular feedback: Erring star performers should be given regular feedback on how their behaviour is affecting others by both their supervisor and other team members; this will help them to modify their conduct. Coaching and counseling activities can be resorted to. Besides the 360 degree approach it is equally important to have direct feedback sessions with star performers so they know the exact consequences of not changing their behavior.