Toxic staff member adds no value to your firm

Never compromise on company culture even if the recruit is a top talent. PHOTO | BD GRAPHIC 

By DR FRANK NJENGA

Our company culture is a critical part of our brand. We recently employed a toxic staff member, though very talented and creative.

He will come to work late and leave early and even our erstwhile positive employees are now showing signs of dissatisfaction and adopting the habits of the new worker. I am scheduling an all-staff meeting to convey my concerns and I am wondering whether it is okay to tell him to the face that he is the source of this mess. Or I let him go.

---------------------------------------

Just to get the basics, a toxin is a poisonous substance usually produced by a plant or animal. Your new member of staff is, therefore, acting like a poison, with the potential of destroying your company culture.

Again, and so that we get terms you have used in their right perspective, let us briefly examine the term “Company Culture”.
There are many ways of looking at this subject, and experts differ in the ways they attempt to define the terms. The following is just one of the many.

What is not in dispute, however, is that different companies have different cultures, and equally importantly, that the same company can evolve from a predominance of one culture to another over a number of years.

Similarly, different CEOs can mould a company from one cultural practice to another. Other factors that could define the culture of the company include the size, location, product, as well as the personalities of shareholders. A single major shareholder in a large company could exert influence. Steve Jobs is an excellent example of this.

One type of culture that is well recognised is “the clan culture”. In this type of company, there is a great deal of family-type interaction, in which an old man (or woman) exerts his influence by way of mentoring, nurturing, and with a democratic way of doing things. In this type of company, profits are important and must be made, but people come first.

There is emphasis on integration and internal focus, sometimes at the expense of the company. In return, however, one gets loyal, stable and long-serving employees.

Not surprisingly, this type of culture is to be found in some businesses that started off as family business. Some managers of non-family businesses, however, adopt this style.

Some, usually smaller companies, are, by their nature, more entrepreneurial, take risks and can be seen to be dynamic. These companies are these days more likely to be in the IT field, and likely to be managed by younger people, who by the nature of things have a greater appetite for risk-taking. Banks and insurers cannot be managed by this method because they are highly regulated.

‘Ad-hocracy’ as this management style is sometimes called, is associated with persons with features of attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). A good example is the Virgin group of companies owned and run by Sir Richard Branson.

At the opposite pole of this Company Culture is one that is fully and centrally controlled and with efficiency and stability at the centre of the philosophy of the company.

The MD of such a company is more likely than not to show features of obsession. The hierarchy is clearly defined. There is no doubt about who is boss and the rules of engagement are clear.

From reporting times to the format of outgoing mail, are all regimented. Any person coming to work without black shoes, tie and a dark suit is not allowed through the gates. Dressing down on Fridays is for people who lack discipline and are prone to laziness and heavy drinking. Such people cannot work in such a company.