His/her behavior is toxic but I can't fire him/her!
“Even though s/he puts up a front as if s/he is an angel to our clients, we know s/he is a pathological liar, toxic, manipulative, abusive, passive-aggressive individual who undermines and sabotages the work of others while thriving on gossip and spreading rumors, but we just can’t fire him/her!”
I have seen and heard various iterations of the above repeatedly from leaders and board members who face challenges of dealing with employees who exhibit toxic behaviors.They not only underperform, which is harmful in and of itself, but also negatively impact the morale, retention, and performance of others through their toxic behaviors. Even if they perform and excel in their assigned tasks, their negative impact on team synergy and organizational performance cannot be ignored. Based on my experience training leaders and board members, I have identified some reasons they may hesitate to terminate such employees, as well as some suggestions for overcoming these hesitations:
Belief in Potential Change: Some leaders hesitate to fire employees who exhibit toxic behaviors because they believe in their potential to change for the better despite persisting behavior. While denying an employee's potential for change isn’t realistic, remaining somewhat delusional is problematic. Such a belief isn’t necessarily rooted in observing tangible positive changes and an improved pattern of behavior due to performance improvement plans and coaching opportunities. Rather, leaders have convinced themselves of it as a scapegoat for lacking the courage to prioritize the overall health and effectiveness of the organization by making the difficult decision of termination. To mitigate this, leaders who conduct a thorough performance evaluation and don’t see progress within a specific timeframe, and are still indecisive, should step down from their leadership role at least to safeguard their professional credibility and moral conscience.
Knowledge Transfer Concerns: If the employee has been with the organization for a long time and possesses unique administrative knowledge, such as method and cadence to contact specific donors or vendors, it can be daunting to find someone who can handle their tasks smoothly. In this case, providing training to other staff members and creating comprehensive documentation of databases, processes and procedures can help facilitate a smooth transition.
Service Disruption Concerns: Firing a toxic employee may disrupt ongoing projects or programs, affecting the organization's ability to fulfill its mission. To mitigate this, board members can develop contingency plans of temporary disruption, redistribute responsibilities among existing team members, or explore temporary support options until a suitable replacement is found.
Replacement Challenges: Board members may worry about the challenges of finding a competent and suitable replacement for the employee. This can be addressed by conducting a thorough recruitment process, leveraging professional networks, and considering the potential for cross-training existing staff members to fill the role.
Compassion for Personal Circumstances: In cases where the employee is a widower, single mother, or facing other financial challenges, and relies solely on their nonprofit role for their livelihood, board members may feel hesitant to terminate their employment out of concern about adding further burdens. This hesitance of deeply compassionate leaders, while not mandatory or theologically and logically sound, can be redirected through termination in conjunction with the exploration of offering financial counseling, referring them to job placement services, and connecting them with community resources that can help alleviate the impact of termination.
Personal Relationship and Attachment: Board members may be relatives of the individual who exhibit toxic behaviors or may develop personal connections or emotional attachments to them, making it difficult to separate their personal feelings from their duty to the team, organization and the community. Encouraging open discussions around conflicts of interests, and reminding board members of their moral and fiduciary responsibilities to separate personal feelings from organizational duties can help them make objective decisions in the best interest of the organization.
Emotional Instability: Dealing with an emotionally unstable employee who exhibits toxic behaviors can be challenging. Board members should prioritize the safety and well-being of the organization's staff, taking necessary precautions to mitigate potential harm and seeking support from law enforcement authorities and mental health professionals if needed.
Fear of Retaliation: Retaliation from the employee who consistently exhibits toxic behaviors can be intimidating. Board members may be reluctant to take action due to concerns that the toxic individual will spread false damaging rumors about the organization or members in it. To overcome this, it's important to establish a culture of transparency and clear communication, ensuring that accurate information is readily available to stakeholders to refute inaccurate rumors and alleviate doubts. Additionally, It's essential to have measures in place to protect the organization and its members, such as legal measures and documenting/acting on instances of retaliation/misconduct/harassment, etc.
Legal Concerns: Board members might be concerned about potential legal consequences or wrongful termination lawsuits if they do not have sufficient evidence or documentation to support their decision to fire the employee. This fear of violating employment laws can make them cautious about taking action. To mitigate this, board members should consult with HR or legal advisors for guidance and support to ensure compliance with all relevant regulations, document performance and behavior issues accurately, follow established policies and procedures, and enroll in training on employment laws and termination best practices.
Fear of Community Backlash: Front-line and client-facing employees who exhibit toxic behaviors often present a deceptive and heavily filtered version of themselves to community members in order to gain their trust and loyalty. Therefore, board members might fear negative reactions and drama (such as rallies, boycotts, withdrawing from services and withholding donations) from certain community members if they decide to fire the employee. It's crucial to be prepared to communicate the facts and the organization's response to stakeholders, donors, and the public in a proactive manner by addressing the reasons behind the decision and emphasizing the organization's commitment to its mission and values.
By acknowledging and addressing these hesitations and concerns, leaders and board members can navigate the challenges associated with terminating employees who exhibit toxic behaviors, thereby fostering a healthier and more productive organizational environment.
Best regards,
Dr. Mohammed Almathil