Toxic employees are unconcerned about the company’s goals or the development of connections with coworkers. Toxic employees are more than just self-centered office bullies; they are also strategic and hidden.
According to a Harvard Business School study published in 2015 by Michael Housman and Dylan Minor, a “toxic” employee is one who: “A worker that engages in behavior that is harmful to an organization, including either its property or people.”
According to the data, toxic workers cause other employees to quit an organisation more quickly and frequently, resulting in high turnover and training expenditures, as well as lowering the productivity of everyone around them.
According to the Harvard Gazette, client customer polls show that toxic employees “definitely” harm a company’s customer service reputation, which has a long-term financial impact that is difficult to measure.
The study also calculated the cost of discovering a “rock star” — defined as employees in the top 1% of productivity — versus the cost of avoiding a toxic employee.
According to the research, employers can save an average of $12,489 by avoiding the hire of a toxic employee by avoiding potential legal fees and a drop in staff morale, among other factors.
According to the statistics, avoiding a toxic employee delivers roughly two-to-one returns when compared to hiring a rock star.
According to the Harvard study, toxic employees are more productive than the average worker. This helps to explain why outstanding players, for example, who are horrible in the locker room or have “off-the-field troubles,” may stay with their teams, and why toxic employees can stay with their companies.