6 ms·

https://news.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/16-057_d45c0b4f-fa19-49de-8f1b-4b12fe054fea.pdf https://news.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/16-057_d

https://news.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/16-057_d45c0b4f-fa19-49de-8f1b-4b12fe054fea.pdf https://news.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/16-057_d... It comes to a figure of 12k loss as the cost of replacing the toxic employee. Yes, replacing an employee is always a net loss in isolation. It seems to be using a tautological definition: defines a “toxic” employee as: “A worker that engages in behavior that is harmful to an organization, including either its property or people.” Yes, that causes a net loss. By definition. They also state they don't consider "productivity spillover" because they found spillover can sometimes be negative so they just assume it all cancels out. If Bob rebuilds something and saves every other employee lots of time going forward.... this analysis just ignores it. The news coverage makes it seem like a tickbox study tailored to HR interests in large orgs, so they can pat themselves on the back for 'proving' that teamwork trumps uncharismatic productivity, despite the study saying nothing about that. If one wanted to truly study these costs, they'd also be looking at charismatic unproductive people who, despite all making each other feel good, don't actually bring any value to an organisation.

EpicEng 8y ago
Did you swipe this from reddit? https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/asmvxc/til_a_harvard_study_found_that_hiring_one_highly/egvetvs/ https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/asmvxc/til_a...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- andrewflnr 8y ago
  Alternatively, you found GP's Reddit account.
  - EpicEng 8y ago
    Nope, checked that before posting here. https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/asmvxc/til_a_harvard_study_found_that_hiring_one_highly/egvop31/ https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/asmvxc/til_a...
Nasrudith 8y ago
Also "toxic" is a term abused to mean "heretical" at times. The guy pointing out HR works for the company not you and is encouraged to some negative dynamics to justify their salary by reducing liability and claimed productivity may be branded toxic. Charismatic people building their own fiefdoms that view networking as king and actual productivity gains a threat are building not just houses of cards but full scale card mansions are more actual organizational harm toxic than any ill-mannered productives.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
commandlinefan 8y ago
> tautological definition There's a picture that gets re-posted on LinkedIn periodically of Netflix's CTO Reed Hastings captioned with a quote attributed to him: "Do not tolerate brilliant jerks. The cost to teamwork is too high." Although this is the sort of feel-good positive fluff that is perfect LinkedIn-bait, I can't help but notice that the people who re-post it and re-share it tend to be people who I remember personally as being mostly just regular jerks. Look, I know better than to characterize myself as "brilliant" on the internet (and I honestly don't think I am, although I do think I'm competent), two things I indisputably am are educated and experienced. Since the subjective words "talented" and "brilliant" and "rockstar" are usually used as a stand-in for the more objective but contentious terms educated and experienced, I can't help but think that somewhere in the back of their minds, they're including me in their list. The people in my network who re-post this platitude usually didn't like me very much because they found themselves in a sticky situation that they expected me to be able to get them out of. When you're educated and experienced, but you still can't solve somebody's crisis on the spot, they don't think, "oh, well, I was asking a lot", they think, "he could have helped me, but he didn't because he's a jerk who thinks he's too good for me".
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- Zimahl 8y ago
  If more than one person has thought you are a jerk, especially more than one at a single job, and you don't know why, you're probably a jerk. The classic sign of a jerk is someone who can't pinpoint why someone would think they are a jerk in the first place. Or worse, you know why but you just don't care. As far as toxic workers go (jerks included), there are a lot of reasons they are toxic: * They are negative all the time. They sap the enjoyment out of the room. * They are highly critical of other's work. No one else has a problem with the work others are doing, they just nit-pick every little thing. * They avoid hard work and only go after prestige projects. They'll try to push stuff like maintenance work onto others, and half-ass it when they have to do it. * Anything they do wrong is met with a strong defense mechanism and a need to deflect into someone else. I'm sure there's more, these are just off the top of my head. Contrary to belief, being 'brilliant' has absolutely nothing to do with whether someone can be toxic. I've met a few toxic people in software and out, and some were downright mediocre.
unknowns 8y ago
I found the guy. If I try as hard as I possibly can and output 20% of an amazing individual. do I have no place in this world? Listen, this is the basic level of human interaction. manners are oil for bodies at friction, and respect is a gateway to team participation. If you cant see the value in that, then you are the problem. You can output a million times the output of your team, but if you dont have a team then you have nothing except yourself. and if you are the only reason for success.. why arent you Jeff Bezos? "charismatic unproductive people who, despite all making each other feel good, don't actually bring any value to an organisation." -- This phrase stinks of devaluation. if you have a team that you view every member of as providing nothing of quality, then again.. you are the problem. Everyone has something to provide, on many different levels.you are failing to see that, and that is your problem. but carry on my friend. if you are as amazing as you say, then ill read about you in the news soon.
- tekno45 8y ago
  What if they are all find slacking off together super fun and make each other feel great...but don't get any work done?
- ramblerouser 8y ago
  >Everyone has something to provide, on many different levels.you are failing to see that, and that is your problem. Totally false. Some prople are really bad at their jobs and gang up with other unproductive people to rag on those who are carrying the team. If you cant see that, you are probably insecure and rationalizing your hostility to people who are better and make you look bad in comparison.
  - unknowns 8y ago
    Hold up.. there are "gangs" of bad employees who team up together just rag on those carrying the team.. (you... right?) Man.. so glad Im insecure enough to rely on these gangs to fight my battles for me. Millions of bad employees but only 5 rockstar developers like yourself. I dont stand a chance.
    - 8y ago
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
killjoywashere 8y ago
> charismatic unproductive people Not to drag politics into this, but, seriously, I think Trump has this category covered quite nicely. The costs are staggering.

EpicEng 8y ago

Did you swipe this from reddit? https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/asmvxc/til_a_harvard_study_found_that_hiring_one_highly/egvetvs/ https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/asmvxc/til_a...

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
andrewflnr 8y ago
Alternatively, you found GP's Reddit account.
- EpicEng 8y ago
  Nope, checked that before posting here. https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/asmvxc/til_a_harvard_study_found_that_hiring_one_highly/egvop31/ https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/asmvxc/til_a...

Nasrudith 8y ago

Also "toxic" is a term abused to mean "heretical" at times. The guy pointing out HR works for the company not you and is encouraged to some negative dynamics to justify their salary by reducing liability and claimed productivity may be branded toxic. Charismatic people building their own fiefdoms that view networking as king and actual productivity gains a threat are building not just houses of cards but full scale card mansions are more actual organizational harm toxic than any ill-mannered productives.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

commandlinefan 8y ago

> tautological definition There's a picture that gets re-posted on LinkedIn periodically of Netflix's CTO Reed Hastings captioned with a quote attributed to him: "Do not tolerate brilliant jerks. The cost to teamwork is too high." Although this is the sort of feel-good positive fluff that is perfect LinkedIn-bait, I can't help but notice that the people who re-post it and re-share it tend to be people who I remember personally as being mostly just regular jerks. Look, I know better than to characterize myself as "brilliant" on the internet (and I honestly don't think I am, although I do think I'm competent), two things I indisputably am are educated and experienced. Since the subjective words "talented" and "brilliant" and "rockstar" are usually used as a stand-in for the more objective but contentious terms educated and experienced, I can't help but think that somewhere in the back of their minds, they're including me in their list. The people in my network who re-post this platitude usually didn't like me very much because they found themselves in a sticky situation that they expected me to be able to get them out of. When you're educated and experienced, but you still can't solve somebody's crisis on the spot, they don't think, "oh, well, I was asking a lot", they think, "he could have helped me, but he didn't because he's a jerk who thinks he's too good for me".

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
Zimahl 8y ago
If more than one person has thought you are a jerk, especially more than one at a single job, and you don't know why, you're probably a jerk. The classic sign of a jerk is someone who can't pinpoint why someone would think they are a jerk in the first place. Or worse, you know why but you just don't care. As far as toxic workers go (jerks included), there are a lot of reasons they are toxic: * They are negative all the time. They sap the enjoyment out of the room. * They are highly critical of other's work. No one else has a problem with the work others are doing, they just nit-pick every little thing. * They avoid hard work and only go after prestige projects. They'll try to push stuff like maintenance work onto others, and half-ass it when they have to do it. * Anything they do wrong is met with a strong defense mechanism and a need to deflect into someone else. I'm sure there's more, these are just off the top of my head. Contrary to belief, being 'brilliant' has absolutely nothing to do with whether someone can be toxic. I've met a few toxic people in software and out, and some were downright mediocre.

unknowns 8y ago

I found the guy. If I try as hard as I possibly can and output 20% of an amazing individual. do I have no place in this world? Listen, this is the basic level of human interaction. manners are oil for bodies at friction, and respect is a gateway to team participation. If you cant see the value in that, then you are the problem. You can output a million times the output of your team, but if you dont have a team then you have nothing except yourself. and if you are the only reason for success.. why arent you Jeff Bezos? "charismatic unproductive people who, despite all making each other feel good, don't actually bring any value to an organisation." -- This phrase stinks of devaluation. if you have a team that you view every member of as providing nothing of quality, then again.. you are the problem. Everyone has something to provide, on many different levels.you are failing to see that, and that is your problem. but carry on my friend. if you are as amazing as you say, then ill read about you in the news soon.

tekno45 8y ago
What if they are all find slacking off together super fun and make each other feel great...but don't get any work done?
ramblerouser 8y ago
>Everyone has something to provide, on many different levels.you are failing to see that, and that is your problem. Totally false. Some prople are really bad at their jobs and gang up with other unproductive people to rag on those who are carrying the team. If you cant see that, you are probably insecure and rationalizing your hostility to people who are better and make you look bad in comparison.
- unknowns 8y ago
  Hold up.. there are "gangs" of bad employees who team up together just rag on those carrying the team.. (you... right?) Man.. so glad Im insecure enough to rely on these gangs to fight my battles for me. Millions of bad employees but only 5 rockstar developers like yourself. I dont stand a chance.
  - 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

killjoywashere 8y ago

> charismatic unproductive people Not to drag politics into this, but, seriously, I think Trump has this category covered quite nicely. The costs are staggering.