November 18, 2005
Superstars, or How Terrell Owens is Like a Junk Bond
We've all met the "800 pound gorilla" rainmakers who are narcissistic, obnoxious, disruptive (even vicious)—and absolutely brilliant at what they do. Is mute toleration the only recourse?
Our friends at Wharton suggest firms need to draw the line between behavior that is merely self-absorbed, rude, and off-putting, versus conduct that flouts the organization's values and is actually corrupting. Why draw the line here? Shouldn't high performance excuse, if not exactly redeem, virtually any lawful behavior?
The problem arises when tolerance of the super-star's holding himself above the rules (it's invariably a "him," isn't it?) clashes with the firm's statements of noble purpose, fairness, and respect for all. Essentially, tolerating someone (especially a "star"!) who runs roughshod over the firm's protestations of virtuous dealing with its professionals introduces the foul odor of hypocrisy. Management looks two-faced and their credibility goes into negative territory. People begin to view the firm as amoral; people are disillusioned; morale drops; performance (remember this was all about performance) suffers.
In other words, it's not just virtuous and ethical to draw the line; it's effective and profitable.
Of course, one never progresses in a day or a week from perfectly acceptable to out-of-control. The problem is being keen enough to distinguish acceptable-but-crummy behavior that will not get worse from that that will escalate:
"Often the egregious act is a build up from a series of negative behaviors preceding it. [M]any organizations that have problems with stars could benefit from [efforts to] work things out before the behaviors reach a breaking point."
Precisely; and not to be melodramatic about it, but Enron, Tyco, and Worldcom also started out as small beer corner-cutters.
If your firm is serious about teamwork and collaboration, however, "making an example" of a star who has left the reservation may send one of the strongest messages possible. Which brings us to Terrell Owens' unceremonious de facto departure from the Philadelphia Eagles. If you talk about teamwork but shower boorish superstars with all the money and glory, you deserve the demoralization you will inspire.
Posted by Bruce at November 18, 2005 11:21 AM | TrackBackPosted to Compensation | Cultural Considerations | Leadership Printer-friendly version
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
"Adam Smith, Esq. is, and will remain, the definitive
voice on law firm strategy."
—David
Jabbari, Global Head of Know-How, Allen & Overy
"I just don't know what the profession would do without you."
—Chairman, AmLaw 25 firm
“Constantly stunning.’—Managing Partner
"I read three things: The Wall Street Journal, The Economist,
and Adam Smith, Esq.—and I tell my partners to do the same."
—Managing Partner, AmLaw 50 firm
“You have a fascinating niche which you cover ever so much better than
does the conventional legal press.”
—Walter Olson of Overlawyered
“Required reading: Amazing.”—Venture Capitalist
"You're the brand name in law firm economics. There is no one out
there—repeat, no one—who covers this business better, or thinks about
it more creatively, than you. I tell people this guy is really, really good."
—Chair/Managing Partner, AmLaw 50 firm
Business Pundit
CorporateCounsel.Net Blog
Conglomerate
BusFilm by Larry Ribstein
Business Pundit
Carnival of the Capitalists
Chicago Boyz
Ensight
Marginal Revolution
Ronald Coase Institute
Stephen Bainbridge
"Adam Smith, Esq.,"® an inquiry into the economics of law firms, and the maroon banner, are a federally registered trademark belonging to Adam Smith, Esq., LLC, which is partially owned and controlled by Bruce MacEwen.
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.