Comments on: The 18-month rule and a harrowing tale

By: Clarence Treat

Clarence Treat — Fri, 27 Apr 2018 19:43:32 +0000

That is worthy of a tv special. C

By: Michael O'Daniel

Michael O'Daniel — Wed, 25 Apr 2018 18:25:09 +0000

The difference here is that Dave listened to the concerns of his people and took appropriate action, however painful. When a CEO digs in his or her heels and refuses to remove an executive who’s negatively affecting everyone else’s performance and morale, that can have disastrous repercussions for the company. I’ve personally seen that happen in several cases.

And while I’ve never used the 360 degree reviews, it sounds as if they would be a valuable tool in identifying problems such as this much earlier in the game.

By: Alan

Alan — Wed, 25 Apr 2018 14:56:27 +0000

1. Would 360 degree performance reviews helped discover the problem sooner?
2. Were the execs receiving company performance bonuses, that suffered in short run following the firing?
It’s another helpful anecdote.
Thanks.

By: Dave Berkus

Dave Berkus — Tue, 24 Apr 2018 21:27:24 +0000

In reply to Mark Cofano. Mark, Great questions. The 14 managers saw that I was actively listening, and that I reacted quickly and decisively. If anything, it improved the culture of the company with increased trust in senior management. Yes, revenues did suffer for awhile as the new VP Sales was not as hard-driving. Sales recovered. And the group retired the audio course in handling a bully that they had secretly been passing between each other. There are a multitude of lessons here. There are culture-defining moments in a company's life. And this was one of those.

By: Mark Cofano

Mark Cofano — Tue, 24 Apr 2018 18:54:38 +0000

Good article, thanks. The company and you benefitted by his stellar performance. The other managers “paid” for that upside by dealing with a bad apple. How did you explain your willingness to let his behavior go on so long? Did your reputation as a CEO suffer and if so, how did you repair that?