Toxic employees received some attention lately in the Harvard Business Review report by Dylan Minor. There were some unsurprising conclusions: toxic employees are expensive. But also some curious, paradoxical results in their report: toxic employees can seem to be charismatic and productive.

Another paradox is that they purport to be rule-following and yet get fired for breaking the rules. The rule-following dimension was a self-report. That is, toxic employees professed to be rule followers. We can hypothesize a few things about that. One is they have rigidity in beliefs. In other words, toxic employees lack judgment and flexibility, which is often required to customize solutions to situations. Therefore they rely on rules.

But here’s a more likely explanation. The rule-following was not based on solid data that they actually follow rules, but rather that they thought rules should be followed. That can translate to, “everyone should follow rules, except me.” That would be consistent with the findings that they are overly confident and narcissistic.

Don’t want toxic employees? Don’t hire them.

The report is right in recommending hiring these people should be avoided in the first place. How? Develop some thoughtful interview questions designed to elicit their experience of their world.

Tell me about at time when you were on a team and did more than your share.

  • How often did you find you did more than your share?
  • What did you do to have others participate?
  • How did you feel about doing it all yourself?

Tell me about a mistake you made.

  • What were the circumstances?
  • Who else was involved?
  • How did you discover it was a mistake?
  • What did you learn?

Describe a situation in which your team collaborated to create a solution.

  • What created those conditions?
  • What did others contribute?
  • What was your reaction to the team effort?
  • How were team members recognized?

The responses to these questions will begin to let you know how self-centered they are, and what their view of the world is when it comes to working well together.

What if they’re already on the team?

Sometimes a complainer has a legitimate point about fairness or process. Sometimes they care a lot and don’t know how to convey information in a way that can be heard. I recommend approaching each situation as if the person is well intentioned. Start here:

  • Find out what they see.
  • Solicit their recommendation.
  • Ask them to propose a workflow design or practice that would produce a better result.
  • Find out if they are really eager to contribute more and are making noise because they aren’t challenged.

Occasionally a toxic employee really does have something more they want to offer. They just poorly express their frustrations.

If their complaint or recommendation lacks perspective, provide more detail about constraints and obstacles. Invite them to brainstorm and recommend solutions based on this new data. Maybe they are great at innovative solutions.

If the comments and recommendations are centered on their personal interests, be blunt and definitive about the kind of employee who excels in the company. If it is true, let them know that as a leader you are committed to fostering positive working environments. That means collegial and highly productive. As the report substantiates toxic employees, however productive they seem, actually suck the life out of a department – and profits out of a company.

Swiftly address bad attitudes

When confronting employees with this kind of problem, do not use the word attitude. They cannot hear it and will not agree with it. Instead describe dialogue you have overheard, and just talk about impact. Here are some examples.

  • “Did you notice the look on John’s face when you said that?”
  • “Even though Mary made a mistake, your comment did not contribute to a solution.”
  • “It is your job to share useful information.”
  • “Name calling (or eye rolling) will not be tolerated.”

Bad behavior is not private or confidential. A toxic employee will be observed. Although they can put on a good front, eventually alert leaders will notice their bad behavior.

What makes us vulnerable to charisma?

Turn down the volume on charm. Listen to the words. Watch the action. Note some of these common behaviors:

  • Are they great in a group but critical one-on-one?
  • Do they manage up well, but throw peers under the bus?
  • Do they take all the credit?
  • Do you find yourself defending them because they are so insightful, despite repeated reports from reliable co-workers are consistent about the damage they leave in their wake?

Describe what you have observed. Here’s an approach. “You said your mistake was based on Marco’s numbers, but it’s your job to verify the numbers. It’s your job to own your own results. It’s also your job to help Marco look good in front of clients.”

Perhaps each of us has a little victim inside. We’re vulnerable to joining the “it’s not fair” club that a toxic employee runs. Bring that old (young) small part of yourself into the light and calm it down. Give it some attention. Then you won’t be so vulnerable to a charming but toxic employee extending an invitation into their world.

There is one other reason managers become vulnerable to toxic yet seemingly productive employees: they are knowledgeable. Perhaps they have been with the organization a long time and have deep product or customer knowledge. Or they came with a technical or analytic specialty that’s unique to the organization. Another factor that’s tough to ignore: they produce the greatest sales revenue.

The fear of losing this contribution can cloud a manager’s normally good judgment. A manager who tolerates expensive toxic behavior is volunteering to be held hostage. My advice: remember that you are resourceful, that others will join the effort and find new solutions while you search for the right hire, and that you have solved tough problems before. You will also earn the loyalty of good performers who will be willing to pitch in with renewed energy.

No improvement? No raise.

If you have been exceedingly clear as a company and as a leader that working well with others is a job requirement, then even a seemingly productive employee is not meeting your job requirements. (Remember how expensive they are). While you’re working up the details on the warning, be sure not to give a raise or a bonus. Otherwise you are sending a mixed message.

One possible outcome is for them to quit because, once again, they are not being recognized for all they do. If they really turn it around after getting the tough message through the meeting and the no-raise impact, you can always recognize their improvement and reward it financially later.