4 ms·

I've always viewed superstars who are toxic as flawed. Superstars without toxic traits are rare. As the article states, you are most likely better off without t

by hwstar 11y ago

I've always viewed superstars who are toxic as flawed. Superstars without toxic traits are rare. As the article states, you are most likely better off without the flawed superstars, the problem is, how do you come up with a consistent and effective way of getting rid of them?

mirimir 11y ago
I agree that superstars without toxic traits are rare. However, I believe that both superstar and toxic qualities are learned, and can change. I believe that it's toxic organizations, or at least toxic managers, that shape potential superstars into toxic workers.
- hwstar 11y ago
  1. You are correct, once a toxic CEO gets put in by the board, he fills senior management with people similar to himself. This is the primary way management becomes toxic. 2. Some of them could be coached and become excellent leaders, but most depend on their toxic traits to get ahead, and their performance would plummet if they could not use their toxic traits. Most need to be identified and rooted out.
calinet6 11y ago
A far better question is, how do you create an environment that helps flawed people improve? Most people have flaws. It's 'consistent and effective ways for getting rid of them' that drives them crazy in the first place. One of many things that creates a negative feedback loop that drives a toxic culture, which breeds more "toxic workers."
- hwstar 11y ago
  1. I believe that termination for toxic behaviour is the only way to adjust the behaviour of these types of people. There's the PIP, but these individuals would quit if they were put on a PIP. These individuals aren't dumb, they will have F.U. money, and some of them would be financially independent. 2. In electronics, that would be a positive feedback loop as it is reinforcing the behaviour. A negative feedback loop would reduce the undesired behaviour.
  - calinet6 11y ago
    In behavior as well -- you are correct.

by hwstar 11y ago

mirimir 11y ago

I agree that superstars without toxic traits are rare. However, I believe that both superstar and toxic qualities are learned, and can change. I believe that it's toxic organizations, or at least toxic managers, that shape potential superstars into toxic workers.

hwstar 11y ago
1. You are correct, once a toxic CEO gets put in by the board, he fills senior management with people similar to himself. This is the primary way management becomes toxic. 2. Some of them could be coached and become excellent leaders, but most depend on their toxic traits to get ahead, and their performance would plummet if they could not use their toxic traits. Most need to be identified and rooted out.

calinet6 11y ago

A far better question is, how do you create an environment that helps flawed people improve? Most people have flaws. It's 'consistent and effective ways for getting rid of them' that drives them crazy in the first place. One of many things that creates a negative feedback loop that drives a toxic culture, which breeds more "toxic workers."

hwstar 11y ago
1. I believe that termination for toxic behaviour is the only way to adjust the behaviour of these types of people. There's the PIP, but these individuals would quit if they were put on a PIP. These individuals aren't dumb, they will have F.U. money, and some of them would be financially independent. 2. In electronics, that would be a positive feedback loop as it is reinforcing the behaviour. A negative feedback loop would reduce the undesired behaviour.
- calinet6 11y ago
  In behavior as well -- you are correct.