When to Keep Someone. When to Let Them Go.

Take a moment and think about a time you chose to keep a difficult employee on your team.

Why did you keep them?

Perhaps they were a star performer, a technical savant, or a revenue engine. Maybe they consistently pushed the team beyond its comfort zone in a measurable way.

Now think about the last time you let someone go.

Why did you make that decision?

Perhaps they missed their KPIs or their contribution no longer justified their cost. Other times, a formerly solid employee's professional development falls out of step with the company's growth. 

Most leaders assess talent through a cost-benefit lens. Output matters. Results matter. There is nothing inherently flawed about evaluating performance this way.

Yet performance is not the only variable.

Every person on your team has an impact beyond their job description. Their presence shapes peer relationships, psychological safety, collaboration, and trust. The ripple effects of keeping or removing someone extend far beyond the measurable output of the role.

Deciding solely on work product overlooks a significant component of organizational health. Influence within a system carries weight. The question is not only, “What do they produce?” It is also, “What do they create around them?”

One example many leaders recognize is what Patrick Lencioni describes in The Ideal Team Player as the Skillful Politician.

Lencioni writes that the strongest team members are humble, hungry, and smart. They prioritize the good of the team, pursue excellence, and operate with emotional intelligence. The Skillful Politician is hungry and smart but lacks humility. This individual reads people well, advances initiatives effectively, and delivers results. At the same time, personal agenda can take precedence over collective success.

The Skillful Politician often becomes the employee leaders find most difficult to evaluate. Their talent is undeniable, but so is the friction they create.

I have worked alongside several of these leaders. In fact, one experience prompted me to hire my first coach. The organization waffled on retaining a brilliant yet divisive leader in order to preserve client relationships and revenue. Over time, the cost surfaced in fractured peer relationships and weakened collaboration across the leadership team.

In many organizations, the eventual departure of this type of employee occurs after prolonged tension. By that point, other high performers may have exited and trust may have thinned. What appeared to be an isolated issue often affects far more of the organization than intended.

People management is complicated and messy, no matter how many years you've been in the game.

I'll leave you with these three questions as a lens for the next time you face the decision to retain or release someone:

1. What is this person’s greatest value to the organization?
2. What is their greatest shortcoming?
3. What is the opportunity cost of maintaining the status quo?

The third question is often the most revealing. Opportunity cost includes morale, retention of other high performers, leadership credibility, and the standards you signal through inaction.

Keeping someone is a decision. Letting someone go is a decision. Avoiding the decision is also a decision.

Clarity about total impact, not just performance metrics, allows leaders to act with greater conviction and integrity.