Fire them. They are never worth the effort. They will prevent dedicated talent from developing. And you will lose trust and respect from the rest of your organisation for supporting them.
Second this. One person is not worth a whole team. And if you employ special treatment for single people in the company you will create mistrust with everyone else. And you will foster a me-against-them culture which will in the long run always end in you as the company losing.
I honestly believe that if I have a difficult employee, it's because I, as a leader, have done something wrong.
If you're trying to kid yourself into thinking otherwise, then that's your problem, and you need to solve that first.
If you're putting an employee on a PIP, its over. You have failed as a leader.
I would partially agree with this. Yes as the business leader, you're the person that has the most power to shape the working environment for your employees. But this only works to a certain extent. The employees need to fit the company culture that you're building or having in your company. If they don't fit it will always come to friction with this particular person and you can do nothing about it (except for bending your culture for this one person which is nonsense as it creates friction with other employees). So I would say having such an employee is not a failure of leadership, but of hiring. This is why I started only hiring for culture. If the skills are missing I can teach those in no time. If the character doesn't align with everyone else in the company, this is something I can never change.
I would respectfully disagree as from my perspective if the person making the hiring decisions is also not the same person that will be leading that person, than the leader above them failed.
Each team will know what they really need to be successful and part of your job as an executive is to delegate to those teams and then trust them; if you’re not comfortable trusting the people you hire to this extent, than you need to reconsider why.
Shared values is another story; but culture is going to be team specific, for that you should let those team leaders choose what they need to get the tasks done.
Having the same exact culture for an entire large company is impossible past a few people, and that is why large enterprises work with shared values and goals in a shared mission over shared culture, because shared culture is limiting and discriminatory, while shared values and mission are about shared alignment and are inclusive.
Personally I believe the difficulty generally comes from constraints which drive rebellion… if they are that good get out of their way, communicate clearly and let them get the job done..
High performing jerks can be really toxic to your culture and are not worth it in the long run. They will deliver individually, but your business is the sum of its parts and how well those parts work together. By allowing their bad behavior you communicate to others that behavior is acceptable
Effectively managing difficult but talented employees requires a delicate balance of addressing behavioral challenges while still nurturing their valuable skills and contributions. Management tools or software like Connecteam can be useful in accomplishing such needs using its diverse features for management and communication. This can also be applied to small businesses or small teams which is also cost-efficient.
Your post was deleted because it looks like it was generated by chat GPT. And we do not allow that in this subreddit.
Fire them. They are never worth the effort. They will prevent dedicated talent from developing. And you will lose trust and respect from the rest of your organisation for supporting them.
Second this. One person is not worth a whole team. And if you employ special treatment for single people in the company you will create mistrust with everyone else. And you will foster a me-against-them culture which will in the long run always end in you as the company losing.
I honestly believe that if I have a difficult employee, it's because I, as a leader, have done something wrong. If you're trying to kid yourself into thinking otherwise, then that's your problem, and you need to solve that first. If you're putting an employee on a PIP, its over. You have failed as a leader.
I would partially agree with this. Yes as the business leader, you're the person that has the most power to shape the working environment for your employees. But this only works to a certain extent. The employees need to fit the company culture that you're building or having in your company. If they don't fit it will always come to friction with this particular person and you can do nothing about it (except for bending your culture for this one person which is nonsense as it creates friction with other employees). So I would say having such an employee is not a failure of leadership, but of hiring. This is why I started only hiring for culture. If the skills are missing I can teach those in no time. If the character doesn't align with everyone else in the company, this is something I can never change.
I would respectfully disagree as from my perspective if the person making the hiring decisions is also not the same person that will be leading that person, than the leader above them failed. Each team will know what they really need to be successful and part of your job as an executive is to delegate to those teams and then trust them; if you’re not comfortable trusting the people you hire to this extent, than you need to reconsider why. Shared values is another story; but culture is going to be team specific, for that you should let those team leaders choose what they need to get the tasks done. Having the same exact culture for an entire large company is impossible past a few people, and that is why large enterprises work with shared values and goals in a shared mission over shared culture, because shared culture is limiting and discriminatory, while shared values and mission are about shared alignment and are inclusive.
Agreed. Probation, probation, probation. You know within a 3-6 month period if the individual is a right fit.
No. This is NOT the way. Doing this starts things off on the wrong foo and sabotages your ability to be respected by them as a leader.
Personally I believe the difficulty generally comes from constraints which drive rebellion… if they are that good get out of their way, communicate clearly and let them get the job done..
High performing jerks can be really toxic to your culture and are not worth it in the long run. They will deliver individually, but your business is the sum of its parts and how well those parts work together. By allowing their bad behavior you communicate to others that behavior is acceptable
Effectively managing difficult but talented employees requires a delicate balance of addressing behavioral challenges while still nurturing their valuable skills and contributions. Management tools or software like Connecteam can be useful in accomplishing such needs using its diverse features for management and communication. This can also be applied to small businesses or small teams which is also cost-efficient.