Rounders "Listen, here's the thing.  If you can't spot the sucker at the table in the first half hour, then you are the sucker."

That was Matt Damon's line from the underrated 1998 film called "Rounders."  Worth a watch if you like great psychology and great poker.  With Edward Norton and John Malchovik – you can't go wrong. 

But here's the thing… flip that quote on it's head and ask yourself this…

"If you can't spot the top performer at the table in the first half hour, then you are the top performer."

And it's time for you to find a new table.

Here's where I'm going. 

An article on CNN October 8th called "Obesity, politics, STDs flow in social networks" discussed the fact that our social networks heavily influence our behavior.  Hang around with overweight people and you are more than 3 times more likely to be overweight.  From the article (this one is very interesting…)

"Social networks were crucial to understanding how sexually
transmitted diseases broke out among teenagers in 1996 in Rockdale
County, Georgia, a quiet upper-middle-class suburb near Atlanta.


An investigation found that a collection of young girls, mostly under
16, had been having sex with various clusters of boys, the book said.
This epidemic of syphilis and other diseases stopped when the network
changed, the authors argue.
'They actually figured out a good
intervention there, which was to break apart this central group of
girls that were essentially promoting the spread of this norm of a
heightened sexuality at a very young age,' Fowler said. 'By essentially
quarantining them, the norm couldn't spread anymore, and pretty soon
they were able to get control of the epidemic.'"

But if you look at this in reverse… what if you want your top performers to spread the norm of what they do every day? 

Don't be the best of the worst…

There is an old adage that says being average is the best of the worst or the worst of the best.  If the network you regularly connect with is the first one – move on – find a network that challenges you and drives you to be better.  In almost every case it will be better to be the worst of the best than the best of the worst. 

If you are in sales – hang with the top performers, their behaviors and their approaches will likely rub off on you. 

If you're a manager – move some of your team around – put a few lower performers in with a bigger group of top performers (remember to reinforce the top.)

If you're on your own find a group you think is hitting their stride – get connected – get involved.

As parents we understand this issue all too well – "Don't hang with a bad crowd."  We instinctively know that hanging with a poorly behaving crowd affects our kids behavior.

Think about how organizing your team differently could actually allow the top performers "norms" to spread. 

 

  • Joe Rice

    I like it, its given me a lot to think about with my morning coffee. I wonder though if there is a flip side–if it creates high school type cliques that can lead to resentment by those excluded from the hi-po group. On balance I like the notion.

  • http://profile.typepad.com/2of6 Paul Hebert

    It might – but then again – do I care? I’m worried about business – creating a high performing one. If I have a group who are not high-performing I either find a place in the org where they can reach their potential and the companies – or they find a place out side the organization where they can contribute.

  • simone

    The material problem with Network theory is that it is not causal … the arrow of causality is indeterminate … the study shared sounds nice but I am not convinced it is any different from standard infectious disease protocols

  • http://profile.typepad.com/2of6 Paul Hebert

    Thanks Simone – If I’m understanding your point – using the “overweight” example – do people gain weight BECAUSE of their relationship with overweight folks in their network – or do overweight people end up creating networks because of their weight?
    I would say that is entirely possible. However, in my example of performance I was suggesting that you manually move folks around – eliminating the organic side of the equation.
    Social norms are social norms regardless of how they form. Putting lower performers with higher performers should (assuming the weighting – no pun – is done so there are more performers than non) create a situation where the lower performers pick up the norms of that group.
    Causality is less of an issue in this case no?

More in Uncategorized (284 of 816 articles)