Promoting top individual contributors into management often backfires. Their competitive nature, which drove individual success, makes it hard to share tips, empathize with struggling team members, or handle interpersonal issues, turning a perceived win-win into a lose-lose situation.
Related Insights
Companies mistakenly bundle management with authority, forcing top performers onto a management track to gain influence. Separate them. Define management's role as coordination and context-sharing, allowing senior individual contributors to drive decisions without managing people.
Focusing on individual performance metrics can be counterproductive. As seen in the "super chicken" experiment, top individual performers often succeed by suppressing others. This lowers team collaboration and harms long-term group output, which can be up to 160% more productive than a group of siloed high-achievers.
Transitioning from a top-performing rep requires a mindset shift from doing to enabling. A new leader's role is not to teach their specific 'Michael Jordan' method, but to align company and personal goals, then focus on removing obstacles for each team member's unique path to success.
The transition from a hands-on contributor to a leader is one of the hardest professional shifts. It requires consciously moving away from execution by learning to trust and delegate. This is achieved by hiring talented people and then empowering them to operate, even if it means simply getting out of their way.
Many leaders mistakenly manage their team as a single entity, delivering one-size-fits-all messages in team meetings. This fails because each person is unique. True connection and performance improvement begin by understanding and connecting with each salesperson on a one-on-one basis first.
A manager's highest duty is to an employee's fulfillment, not just their performance. When a top performer is not personally aligned with their role, a leader should actively help them find a better fit—even if it means using their own social capital to place them at another organization.
Leaders with an operations background often clash with the emotional, less-structured nature of sales. To succeed, they must actively study sales management to bridge this mindset gap, not just learn tactics. This prevents frustration and enables them to guide their sales team effectively instead of trying to force them into rigid processes.
Biologist William Muir's 'super chicken' experiment revealed that groups of top individual performers can end up sabotaging one another, leading to worse outcomes than more cooperative, average teams. In business, this 'too much talent problem' manifests as ego clashes and a breakdown in collaboration, undermining collective success.
The biggest blind spot for new managers is the temptation to fix individual problems themselves (e.g., a piece of bad code). This doesn't scale. They must elevate their thinking to solve the system that creates the problems (e.g., why bad code is being written in the first place).
