Organizations often celebrate high performers as the backbone of growth and success. They are the ones who excel in their targets, drive innovation, and lead with courage and inspiration.
Consider the case of Mohan, who was a top performer who consistently led one of the largest sales zones, exceeding targets with strong business acumen. Despite this, HR resisted his promotion due to high attrition, frequent escalations, low learning participation, lack of top talent, peer conflicts, and a warning for aggressive conduct during meetings.
While the leader acknowledged these concerns, he emphasized Mohan's strengths and his reluctance to lose him. To address the behavioral issues, Mohan had received feedback and might be assigned a coach.
This scenario raises a critical question: Should organizations promote high-performing individuals even if doing so harms culture and team dynamics? My experiences with such dilemmas led me to explore how organizations can balance the rewards of exceptional performance with the risks posed by dysfunctional behavior.
Understanding Top Talent
Top talent consistently delivers strong results, is highly motivated, and displays expertise; notably, research suggests they comprise about 15-20% of an organization.
Psychological Entitlement and Top Talent
Every employee has a social contract with the enterprise. The contract is grounded in an interdependent exchange relationship based on the principle of reciprocity, in which the exchange of resources between the two parties instills a sense of obligation to reciprocate (Gouldner, 1960).
From a social exchange perspective (Blau, 1964; Cropanzano & Mitchell, 2005), employees provide resources, such as effort or loyalty, to their organization in exchange for financial and socio-emotional benefits (Aselage & Eisenberger, 2003). However, because the resources exchanged are subjective and discretionary, perceptions may vary.
Entitlement arises when someone feels more deserving of resources than others at the same level of input. High performers may develop a sense of psychological entitlement, which can lead to lower levels of organizational citizenship behavior (discretionary effort). Power strengthens the link between performance and entitlement, as high performers control how they share their results. This entitlement may cause them to retain behaviors that benefit the organization.
Cropanzano et al. (2003) highlight power as a condition under which job performance is indirectly and negatively related to OCB via psychological entitlement.
Top Talent and Counterproductive Behavior
While top talent meets high demands, over time, they may be labeled "cultural bullies," with consequences for attrition, engagement, productivity, and employer branding. Even as these individuals drive results and innovation, their lack of interpersonal skills can damage morale, workflows, and the work environment. Such "brilliant performers" are problem solvers but often ignore interpersonal dynamics, resulting in burned bridges within teams.
Counterproductive behaviors are distinct because they are volitional, not accidental or mandated. These actions harm organizations or stakeholders, including coworkers, supervisors, clients, and customers (Spector et al., 2006). Often arising from unfairness and workplace incivility, such behaviors lead to unfair treatment and damage organizational interests.
Addressing the Counterproductive Behavior
All too often, organizations overlook the counterproductive behavior of top talent because of their high impact. However, such behavior can ultimately undermine individual motivation, team spirit, and workplace culture.
Jack Welch described "Type 4" workers as those who deliver on the numbers but lack the right values. Welch claimed that, although difficult, it was critical to remove such talent: "People are removed for having the wrong values...we don't even talk about the numbers" (Bartlett & Wozny, 2005).
1. Role of Manager
Managers who encounter top performers exhibiting counterproductive behavior must engage in high-stakes conversations. It is essential to provide open, specific feedback on the behavior's impact on people, teams, and the overall enterprise culture, rather than avoiding the issue.
2. Enforcing a zero-tolerance policy is key
Counterproductive behavior by top talent must be addressed immediately. Initially, strong feedback and formal intervention are required; for repeated offenses, such behavior cannot be tolerated.
In addition, leaders must develop a deep understanding of organizational culture. Culture is shaped by the worst behavior that leadership tolerates; therefore, it is essential to explore it through conversations and one-on-one interactions. A truly inclusive organization fosters psychological safety and candid feedback.
Therefore, the culture should support regular feedback mechanisms to address both productive and counterproductive behaviors.
3. Institutionalizing core values
Core values must extend beyond posters and be reflected in employees' everyday experiences. Regular check-ins ensure the values resonate with people and leaders exemplify them through their actions.
Ultimately, tolerating counterproductive behavior among top talent undermines the enterprise's ethos. Organizations must be clear about which leadership values matter most and act accordingly.
The real win for any organization is finding balance. High performers should be recognized, but they also need to grow in areas like teamwork, empathy, and communication.
References
- Aselage, J., & Eisenberger, R. (2003). Perceived organizational support and psychological contracts. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24(5), 491–509. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.211
- Bartlett, C. A., & Wozny, M. (2005). GE's two-decade transformation: Jack Welch's leadership (Rev. ed.). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Publishing.
- Becton, J. B., Walker, H. J., Schwager, P. H., & Gilstrap, J. B. (2017). Is what you see what you get? Investigating the relationship between social media content and counterproductive work behaviors, alcohol consumption, and episodic heavy drinking. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 28(8), 1203–1227. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2017.1314977
- Blau, G. (1993). Operationalizing direction and level of effort and testing their relationships to individual job performance. Journal of Management, 19(1), 51–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639301900104
- Cropanzano, R. (2005). Social exchange theory: An interdisciplinary review. Journal of Management, 31(6), 874–900. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206305279602
- Cropanzano, R., Rupp, D. E., & Byrne, Z. S. (2003). The relationship of emotional exhaustion to work attitudes, job performance, and organizational citizenship behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(1), 160–169. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.1.160
- CX Journey™. (2022, May). Employees, culture, and the Great Resignation. CX Journey Blog. https://cx-journey.com/2022/05/employees-culture-and-the-great-resignation.html
- Gouldner, A. W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25(2), 161–178. https://doi.org/10.2307/2092623
- Quintero Obonaga, M. (2025). Work, life and the Latin American migrant: The complex experiences of Colombian highly qualified migrants in Britain. CORE. https://core.ac.uk/download/644556883.pdf
- Spector, B., & Lane, H. (2006). Exploring the distinctions between a high-performance culture and a cult. Strategy & Leadership, 35(3), 18–24. https://doi.org/10.1108/10878570710745984
- Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research: Truth or urban legend? Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428105284955
Was this resource helpful?
Validate your HR expertise
Earning your SHRM-CP credential makes you a recognized expert and leader in the HR field.
Related Content
Transform HR with mobile technology to streamline workflows, enhance communication, and boost employee engagement across distributed teams.
A new study found that talent development practitioners believe performance-based assessments are more effective at measuring employee learning outcomes than knowledge tests.
As AI makes deeper inroads into organizations, employee concerns about the technology continue to grow. Here's how HR leaders can address the fear of AI among their own staff, as well as in the wider organization.