Everything We Get Wrong About High Performers

Everyone wants a team of high performers. Or do they? This week, Jimmy and James dismantle the corporate obsession with “high performers”—a label so vague it could mean anything from “top salesperson” to “office psychopath who throws toys out of the pram when they don’t get their way. The episode exposes the absurdity of how organisations define, reward, and often suffer from their so-called high performers. Is it the person who hits the numbers? The one who sucks up to the boss? Or the quiet grafter who never makes a fuss? Jimmy and James argue that the real problem isn’t just the subjectivity—it’s the chaos left in their wake. High performers can be super chickens, pecking their colleagues to death while laying golden eggs. And if you fill a team with them? You’ll end up with a department full of egos and a trail of destruction. But here’s the twist: maybe the goal shouldn’t be a team of high performers at all. Maybe it’s about creating a high-performing team. The hosts tackle the hero culture, the danger of rewarding firefighters over fire preventers, and the self-fulfilling prophecy of labelling people as “low performers.” And, of course, they ask the question no one else will: What if your high performer is just someone who looks like you and agrees with you? Five Key Points: High performers are often as easy to spot as a needle in a haystack—if the needle is on fire and screaming about how great it is. The “Frank” dilemma: What do you do when your top performer is also your biggest liability? Hero culture and firefighting: Why organisations reward the wrong behaviours. The super chicken experiment: Why a team of high performers might just peck each other to death. The canoe theory: Focus on the middle, not just the front.