No need to tolerate Brilliant Jerks

I want to share with you one of the most important leadership principles I try to use in my work and team management approaches.

When I just started writing, I realized that I got it from numerous books and articles. As usual, the know-how was never mine.

Well.

Here’s how this principle is phrased by Netflix CEO Reed Hastings: “We Don’t Tolerate Brilliant Jerks”.

The very same thing is well explained in one of my favorite books, EMPOWERED: Ordinary People, Extraordinary Products.

From this book, I learned a fascinating fact: the most successful sports team in the world is not the New York Yankees, Chicago Bulls or Manchester United. Instead, it’s the New Zealand All Blacks rugby team (you may remember them for their famous Haka dance). Because of these guys, New Zealand has unequivocally dominated rugby for more than 100 years.

The New Zealand team has the same principle of selecting players and coaches: “No jerks allowed”. No matter how incredibly talented a particular person is. If they happen to be a jerk, they will negatively affect the whole team. It is better to get rid of one toxic person rather than have the rest of the team adjust and struggle.

I have been working as a people manager since 2013, nearly ten years now. During all this time, I faced multiple situations when a single person enraged the entire team. Yes, they could be a very talented and skilled specialist. But they demotivate a large group that is performing just fine without them.

I was not always quick to resolve such issues. Once, I even reached the point where I had two of my employees resign, as they saw no point in wasting their nerves on working with one particular person. That was when I realized: I had been waiting far too long for the problem to resolve itself. So, I parted ways with a toxic person, saving the other two employees.

However, do not take this text as advice to immediately fire everyone who is disliked by others. Instead, make sure to get rid of toxicity: the person in question is a negativist, they publicly criticize the company, pick fights with colleagues, are aggressive and impolite, and do not comply with work ethics.

Such negative things are well seen on one-on-ones (by the way, I am planning to write a post about such meetings) and on 360 feedback sessions (in large companies, this method is used to receive feedback from everyone who’s working with you: peers, subordinates and direct managers).

And even if the feedback from all sides confirms that the employee in question is negatively affecting the whole team, a good people manager should always give a chance to fix the attitude and situation. For this purpose, I used to have two or three one-on-one meetings, explaining my concerns to the employee and describing how the whole team was affected. In case the problem is not solved in a couple of weeks, I can see the one and only way out.

That’s the principle. I have way more, so stay tuned!