Most firms have a handful of very competitive and professionally able people who are brilliant at generating business and delivering results. They are often very creative and instrumental in driving the firm in new and more effective directions. Usually they are able to combine these considerable talents with being effective team players. If so, the benefits to the firm can’t be overestimated. Occasionally, though, however outstanding they may be as individual performers, they are hopeless at teamwork. They insist on having their own way and being strong personalities they usually succeed. They often prefer to ‘walk alone’ rather than participate in shared efforts such as a team marketing event. At worst they are critical, domineering, unwilling to help others, brusque and even, though charming to their own clients, rude to their colleagues. In short they behave like temperamental ‘prima donnas’.
Many firms put up with this sort of behaviour because they take the view that the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. Even some of those firms that place great stress on good teamwork are prepared to make exceptions. One managing partner told me ‘that whilst we believe in teamwork we occasionally have to make an exception and play to people’s strengths. This means tolerating egocentric behaviour especially when the people concerned deliver good personal results.’ There is a difference, I believe, between welcoming eccentricity and enjoying the creative benefits that often accompany it, and putting up with dysfunctional relationship behaviour. The price that a firm pays for letting occasional ‘prima donnas’ get away with irritating, annoying and frustrating their colleagues is considerable. They are failing to come into line with the firm’s generally accepted ways of doing things. However talented they are personally, the effect of their behaviour on the team and the firm generally in the long run is likely to outweigh the advantages that they bring. If you want to maintain a congenial working environment, which is conducive to attracting and retaining good people, then you need to take action to deal with the reluctant team players. The suggestions in Helping Team Members to Get the Best Out of Themselves on giving feedback are especially relevant. Consider using these in conjunction with the following guidelines:
- Describe the behaviour that is causing concern. It is particularly important to avoid commenting on personality traits. Stick to behaviour with specific examples of what you have observed. Avoid hearsay, rumours and gossip. Be frank and avoid euphemisms. Explain the adverse effect that the undesirable behaviour is having on you and your team colleagues.
- Try to ascertain the reasons for the unacceptable behaviour. Although it is rarely a matter of deficient communication skills or personal problems that is causing the difficulty it is nevertheless necessary to find out. More often it is a strong preference for working alone and being in total control of one’s own destiny that is at the root of the problem.
- Help your colleague to understand that he or she will benefit from changing. Explain that people who have the respect of their colleagues are more likely to gain cooperation when it is needed. Emphasize the value for everyone that comes from willing teamwork including the sharing of knowledge, provision of ideas, better problem solving and support of each other in tough times. Stress that your colleague has a lot to offer that could lead to better results all round and rewards to follow.
- Ask the person concerned to suggest possible solutions. Ask questions aimed at encouraging the acceptance of responsibility to put things right. Avoid imposing your own solutions. They are likely to be resisted. Agree some small steps and goals for changing behaviour. Be prepared for small steady improvements and offer your support and encouragement. Make it very clear that you value your colleague’s contributions but that you believe that things could be so very much better.
- Have periodic follow-up discussions to discuss progress. Reinforce changes in behaviour by acknowledging the benefits. Talk about the things that still need to be done and agree the further steps that may be taken.
- The greatest danger for team leaders is to indulge outstanding individual performers who are poor team players whilst at the same time taking moderate performers to task. Team members will perceive double standards. It is likely to be resented and in the worst cases lead to a lowering of morale and a consequent decline in team performance.
What happens if all of this effort fails and behaviour does not change? Managing Partner Tim Aspinall at law firm DMH is very clear about what has to be done:
The best-performing organizations comprise individuals who share the same culture and are committed to implementing the agreed strategies. This is because everybody is pulling in the same direction and more likely to be supportive of each other. In many organizations, however, and this included DMH, there are individuals who are technically expert at what they do, often high fee earners and great work winners, but who don’t fully subscribe to the culture, systems and procedures. The easy thing to do in this situation is to try and work around the individual. I have seen organizations put people like this in an office at the end of the corridor and tolerate their refusal to cooperate or, in the worst cases, their negative comments and attitudes because they are afraid to confront the problem. Although this might be seen as the easy solution it creates much larger problems for the organization as a whole as other, more junior individuals feel that the organization tolerates behaviour like this and they ask themselves why they should conform. This leads to the organization becoming dysfunctional. I very strongly believe that individuals like this should be confronted and given the opportunity, support and guidance to change their behaviour so they become fully integrated with the organization. Ultimately though, if the individual isn’t prepared to change then he or she should be asked to leave. We had to make this difficult decision at DMH. It wasn’t easy but putting the organization ahead of the individual made us stronger as a firm and sent a very clear message to everyone that no one person was more important than the whole.
Cheryl Giovannoni, Chief Executive of design firm Coley Porter Bell, makes a similar observation:
Very occasionally we have people who are technically good at their work but who have the wrong attitude of mind. Perhaps they are unwilling to change in the direction that the rest of us want to go or perhaps they are not prepared to sign up to core values. We make a considerable effort to get them to modify their behaviour through formal appraisals and day-to-day coaching. Usually it works but if it doesn’t then in the interests of the firm, our people and our clients we have to part company. Fortunately it is a very rare occurrence.