Controlling CEOs, manipulative middle managers and high-performing jerks can damage employees’ trust in employers and motivate them to hit the job market. Kaye/Bassman’s Michael Pietrack discusses the problematic behaviors executives must watch for in the workplace.
As an executive recruiter, I’ve spent years interviewing leaders, teams and candidates across the biopharma industry. In my experience, one of the most common reasons great employees leave companies is because of people issues. While the individuals driving these employees away present differently, they share one important trait: They create organizational risk that rarely appears on a dashboard until the damage has already been done.
Recognizing the profiles of these individuals can help biopharma executives avoid the pain of joining a company that has these issues or allows them to identify if their current organization harbors these people.
The controlling CEO
Every startup needs a visionary CEO, and often that person is the founder of the company. These leaders often possess the courage, conviction and relentless work ethic required to build something from nothing. Those traits deserve admiration. The problem emerges when the company grows, but the leadership style doesn’t.
When the business is small, a CEO can have their hand in every decision, but as it scales, some of these brilliant leaders struggle with letting go and delegating. Every meeting funnels through one individual. Every expert hired to bring specialized knowledge finds themselves waiting for permission.
Eventually, talented leaders begin asking a dangerous question. “Why did you hire me if you’re going to make every decision yourself?” When decision-making slows, innovation stalls and strong executives leave. The organization becomes increasingly dependent on a single person.
If you’re a CEO reading this, you’ve hired incredibly smart people with a track record of success. Allow them to make decisions or risk them leaving. Avoid becoming the owner of the football team that wants to call every play. The best CEOs or founders evolve from decision-makers into decision architects. Their role becomes setting direction, building the right leadership team and empowering experts to execute.
If you’re not a CEO but are interviewing with one as you explore new opportunities, ask questions that will help you understand how decisions are made in the organization. The answers often reveal whether authority is truly delegated or merely discussed. Beware joining a company where every meaningful decision must flow through the CEO.
The manipulative middle manager
This person is often difficult to identify because they manage up exceptionally well. Senior leadership sees a polished professional, but the manager’s team experiences someone entirely different. With this individual, credit flows upward, blame flows downward. Employees walk on eggshells. Turnover quietly increases as high-potential employees vote with their feet. Ultimately, the company suffers.
The manipulative middle manager explains away every departure as a performance issue, a cultural mismatch or a compensation problem. Because executives often interact with these managers only periodically, the damage can remain hidden for a dangerously long period of time.
This type of manager reminds me of a character in the movie “Happy Gilmore.” When Happy takes his grandmother to the assisted living home, he is met by an apparently sweet and caring orderly played by Ben Stiller. But when Happy’s back is turned, Stiller’s character does the slitting throat gesture to the grandmother.
As an executive, what steps can you take to avoid having this type of manager on your team? One thing that I’ve seen work is to conduct skip-level one-on-one meetings. This is not a witch hunt but a great practice to evaluate the overall health of the team. During those meetings, ask open-ended questions that help paint a clearer picture of how everyone is doing. My favorite questions are “What’s working? What’s not?”
Some leaders give teams anonymous surveys so they can submit feedback without the fear of retaliation. While those surveys are good with bigger teams, in a smaller team setting, it’s easier for the direct manager to know whose responses are whose.
Another way you can find out if you have manipulative middle managers at your company is to listen carefully during exit interviews, if you attend them. If you don’t, then ask HR for a thorough debrief. You will be able to discern the difference between a disgruntled person who is embellishing and someone who helps you understand that the manager you see is not who they see. Remember, the best indicator of a manager’s effectiveness is not what their boss thinks of them. It’s whether talented people want to continue working for them.
The high-performing jerk
This may be the most dangerous person of all. The high-performing jerk consistently delivers results. They exceed goals. They receive awards. And because they perform, they may seem indispensable, especially when leaders excuse their behavior that would be unacceptable from anyone else. The real damage comes when other teammates begin questioning why they should uphold standards that others are allowed to ignore.
The behaviors are varied. The high-performing jerk may neglect team rules, show up late, skip meetings or tear down their colleagues with snide comments. The message these behaviors send to the team is that results matter more than values, and once that lesson spreads, culture deteriorates quickly. It’s like the sports star who kills it on the playing field but kills the culture in the locker room.
As an executive, what should you do when you discover a high-performing jerk at your company? Start by addressing their behavior directly. Coach early. Set clear expectations. Document progress or the lack thereof. Usually, high performers thrive on praise, so if you see them correcting their behavior, commend them. But if the behavior continues, be willing to make the difficult decision to let them go. One toxic high performer can drive away multiple future high performers. That’s a trade no organization should make.
You can further set the tone by rewarding your top cultural champions as much as high-functioning performers. In the end, the best performance is both winning on the proverbial field and in the locker room.
Conclusion
The three individuals described above may look very different. One sits in the corner office, another manages a team and the third may be among the company’s top performers. Yet all three create the same outcome: They undermine trust. And trust, once lost, is far harder to rebuild than revenue.
Executives should regularly ask themselves a difficult question: Are we rewarding the behaviors that build the culture we want or merely the results we happen to achieve? The answer often determines not only who stays but also whether the organization reaches its full potential.
