Comments on: What would you do: Star performer won’t follow rules

By: Jo Watkins

Jo Watkins — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 23:07:17 +0000

I resigned recently from a company who had such a culture. Instead of just one individual, there is a group there who have the “Rules don’t apply” philosophy. They engage in mob bullying, sending porn to each other via office email system, making racial remarks,sexual harasment and character assasination. They come in late, take more than assigned breaks, long lunches,drink on the company dime,leave early…you name it. I worked my tail off for that company but finally had enough when the bully bosses blew up at me for filing a complaint about them for interfering with my department’s production. This was due to an emergency situation where none of them responded because they simply don’t have to follow company policy. As a supervisor I had to daily try to keep the morale of my team up. Does anyone know how hard that is when they look around them and see this. To top it all,they are the ones given perks, a higher salary and respect. If anyone who reads this feature thinks any employee , regardless of tenure,performance or seniority has the right to conduct themselves outside of company policies I suggest think again. It hurts morale more than you think and “TRUE” star performers will leave your organizations in droves.

By: star performer

star performer — Mon, 08 Dec 2008 15:23:05 +0000

I agree with Darrell- If you are a star performer you get perks that are earned and until you have earned it you have no right to compare yourself because everyone is not the same and should not be treated the same

By: Terscot

Terscot — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 17:45:44 +0000

Oh, my, Joe T, aren’t we the melodramatic one! If Jerry had a legitimate need for accomodation, chances are he would have brought it up to HR or to his boss, both of whom obviously are willing to overlook his behavior, in order to further protect his job. But, the bottom line – as long as the company thinks that Jerry can make them more money or provide them a service that no one else can, then Jerry gets to make the rules. While he may “need” to be held accountable, it will not happen because the boss is more scared of losing Jerry than he is of any other potential consequence.

By: Kevin B, HR Manager

Kevin B, HR Manager — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:44:18 +0000

I would agree with Denise. Regardless of the employees performance, he needs to be held to the same policies and procedures as everyone else. High performance is just a part of an outstanding employee. Their attendance plays a major role as well. Employees must be strong in all areas for them to be oustanding. When the employee is at work performing well, they are definitely making an impact to the success of the business. When they are not there, they hamper the business needs. Review your policies regarding attendance and absenteeism. My advice would be to address the issue like you would anyone else.

By: Joe T

Joe T — Tue, 02 Dec 2008 16:02:41 +0000

Most of the responses have decided that Jerry needs counsel, discipline and/or termination if a behavioral change is not forthcoming. Please let us remember who we are–Human Resources. We deal with people and their issues. We have not defined the issue or the person that has the issue.
Is Sam fearful that he will lose his job to Jerry? Is Sam or Jerry’s co-workers envious of Jerry’s success and are seeking to ruin his integrity with false accusations? Just to let you know, Jerry’s wife was in a car accident 5 years ago that left her a quadriplegic. Jerry would rather not broadcast this to the entire company. In the morning, he prepares his wife’s breakfast, gives her a bath, dresses her and tries to comfort her as best he can. Unfortunately, she will spit up some of her breakfast just as Jerry is leaving for the office and he will redress her before he leaves. He goes home at lunch time to empty her colostomy bag and feed her lunch. On paydays, Jerry gives 25% of his pay to the single mom of 4 to help her pay her bills. (It was her husband that caused the car accident that killed him and crippled Jerry’s wife.) It is amazing to me how a person can deal with so much heartache and responsibility and still be the TOP PERFORMER. Does anyone wish to change their comment?

By: Jackie Shields

Jackie Shields — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 17:35:40 +0000

There are valid points in all of the responses. However, since you have allowed Jerry to disobey the policies, you really have no policies that you can enforce or consequences you can apply to the “others” without opening the door to claims of unjust treatment. You can create a category of employee with different work requirements that better fit the work patterns for that group. For example, we have outside sales and they are not accountable for hours, only sales, but this does not apply to any other class of employee in our organization. Thus, it might make more sense to adopt more flexible parameters for your sales force but with a few exceptions, e.g., must attend one meeting per month or whatever fits the needs of your organization. Employees like to have a voice in their work enviornment and are often more productive. Not sure about this but you could also create a penalty system whereby if they miss one of the “exceptions” they lose a percent of their commission or something that equally hurts.

By: Lloyd Campbell

Lloyd Campbell — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:23:18 +0000

First, I would recommend really getting to the root cause of his lateness. Present the facts to him and solicit his input – and vague responses can’t cut it – keep probing. Secondly, his tardiness sounds like its having an impact so I agree that it is something that must be subject to your performance management philosophy: document, communicate clear expectations, document his specific instances of tardiness, communicate the impact of his tardiness and potential consequences. In this scenario, we don’t know the specifics of what he does that makes him such a star performer, but in our work environment, part of what makes someone a star performer is their ability to be a positive influence and role model for others. Sounds like he falls short there. Also, I would never tell an employee this but – as cold as it sounds – everyone is expendible. You may have some other budding star performers out there who just haven’t been given the opportunity to shine. He doesn’t have you over a barrel, so don’t treat him like he does.

By: Deb

Deb — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:22:18 +0000

Bob and Mary are correct – in these circumstances there is no judgement call to make – treat Jerry the same as every other employee.
Or, change the circumstances and consider changing his classification from regular full-time employee to Consultant. His salary could be negotiated and he would be responsible for taxes, vacation time, etc. His performance measures would be based on project results (accuracy, timing, ROI,etc).
Just be prepared to deal with other performance issues. While you may be removing the obvious barrier to “great job performance”, I would be willing to bet something else would crop up.
It sounds like Jerry is lacking the professional maturity to truly contribute, share his knowledge base with co-workers and be part of a team. In my environment, these attributes are definitely part of an employee’s Performance Expectations. Rather than look at just what he can do, it may be time to look at what he doesn’t do – attendance, team work, share client knowledge, problem solving & decision making, organizational perspective, continuous improvement (for self & company). He may not be the star performer people thought him to be.
p.s. now might be a good time to consider cross-training some of your staff.

By: Mike R

Mike R — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 16:12:16 +0000

I see the problem is what is being defined as performance. If Jerry is a “top performer,” then what is that based on? Is it because Janice has a bias towards Jerry? Is that bias based on work performance or personal characteristics?

On the one hand, he may be the most productive sales person or widget installer. But on the other hand, he is a source of discontent and complaints with co-workers and supervisors.

Arriving late, leaving early, and long lunches… sounds like this person’s income is not based on the time he spends “clocked in.” So either it is based on “commission” or he is a salaried worker. Part of top performance is how a person “cooperates” and works within the company structure. If a “top performer” brings in “$100,000″ in sales each quarter, but results in higher employee turnoever and fines for noncompliance for failing to meet training or other standards, then the net “profit” he brings to the company is much smaller than what it initially appears. After you subtract the “hidden costs” for the lateness, the figure looks like “$50,000″ in sales each quarter, then Jerry starts looking more “average” than a top performer.

However, on the other hand, if this is an exempt position and he is the top performer, then the company may need to rethink its scheduling policy. Sounds like Jerry has discovered “home commuting” and “flex time” and the company hasn’t figured that out. Are the meetings scheduled at the best time for all parties, or is the schedule arbitrary or at worst to suit a stuffed shirt who doesn’t really produce anything anyway? Are the meetings in person necessary, or could a conference call or a web conference meet the needs more effectively for all concerned?

And finally, maybe Jerry does have a problem. Some of our workforce have problems like bipolar. We enjoy the heck out of the productivity during the “manic” phases and complain about the “depressive” phases. Every strength has a weakness. Is it worth it to “tone down” Jerry’s productivity to be more in compliance with current workplace expectations?

By: Darrel Tyree

Darrel Tyree — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 15:35:10 +0000

How do you decrease the likelyhood of having top performers? By treating them the same as everyone else. Star performers can be successful because they don’t follow the rules. Attending a meeting obviously has nothing to do with performance, or it would have affected Jerry. I say cut the Star performer some slack, if you get grief from other employees, tell them they could have perks important to them when they become the Star performer. You reduce your chances of a law suit by explaining why Jerry is the exception, and increase you chances of winning a law suit by being clear with why an exception is made in Jerry’s case. Go ahead and discipline others for coming in late, if they squawk, they know what they have to do to prevent discipline, either become the top producer or start coming in on time.