It is naïve to think that you can let your talents speak for themselves. In fact, the more talented you are, the more enemies you will make — particularly in toxic and political organizations.
No matter how talented employee might be, there is no guarantee that their talents will translate into top performance. The science of human potential has generally illustrated, that an individual’s overarching competence cannot be fully understood. Unless we also account for their emotional make-up, preferences, and dispositions. No matter how smart, knowledgeable, and experienced you are, there is generally a difference between, what you can do and what you normally do.
Talent identification fails when employers obsess over “potential” and ignore reality. They evaluate what candidates could do in perfect conditions instead of what they will actually do once the job demands show up. The real test is typical performance, not peak performance.
It works like relationships. The person you meet on the first date is not the person you truly know five years into marriage. Candidates behave the same way. What you see during interviews rarely mirrors how they perform years later. The good news is that the right science and assessment tools can help predict who someone will be in the long run.
Most people underperform at work, and they usually know it. Very few employees stay fully motivated across long periods. Even if you believe you’re performing at your highest level, the odds say otherwise. Research shows a weak connection between how people see their own talent and how they actually perform.
It is often the case that top performers evaluate their own performance more critically and harshly. Whereas those who perform poorly think they are making a fantastic contribution to the company. Self-awareness, it seems, is a critical component of talent.
The truth is that most people are not even bothered to try their best after they have been on the job for more than six months, a time-frame known as the honeymoon period. Although there are many reasons for this, here are four common causes of under-performance and how to address them:
Poor fit happens when personality and environment don’t match. People thrive in some jobs, cultures, and contexts and struggle in others. That is the core of person job fit. It measures how well someone’s values, habits, abilities, and temperament align with the demands of a role and the reality of an organization.
The issue is not that companies misread candidates. Very often, they misread themselves. Many believe they are more inclusive, innovative, or people centric than they truly are. That gap creates a false picture for candidates. Only after joining do employees discover what the culture is actually like and what the role really demands. You can avoid this surprise.
Do the work upfront. Study the organization. Use platforms like Glassdoor for broad signals. Ask detailed questions during interviews. Speak with current employees. Look for similarities between yourself and high performers already in the role. That pattern is one of the most reliable predictors of real fit.There are cases where not fitting in becomes your advantage. Cognitive diversity matters. But as a rule, you will adjust and perform better when your profile aligns with the people who are already succeeding in that environment.
Disengagement: A common side-effect of poor fit is disengagement, though it should be noted that there are also other reasons underlying the prevalent lack of enthusiasm and motivation found in typical workplaces. In fact, one of the most common drivers of disengagement is poor leadership. Management malfunction, particularly of the male variety, not just why so many people underperform at work, but also why talented and star employees quit their jobs, and even traditional employment altogether.The solution to this is not simple.
You can’t just suddenly decide to replace your boss with a better leader — someone who inspires and mentors you, provides objective and constructive feedback on your performance, and gets you excited about work when you wake up every morning. Note that even if your boss is capable of doing all these things, they may not be engaged themselves, perhaps because they work for an incompetent leader (or someone who is not engaged).
But even if you are not able to quit your boss, there are some proven hacks that will likely improve your engagement, and in turn your performance. For example, finding time to be curious and learn will make your job more meaningful. Connecting with your colleagues and nurturing the interpersonal aspect of work is also quite motivating. Finally, telling your boss that you are not engaged may also help, for they may be unaware of it and willing to do something to help you, especially if they value your talents.
Organizational politics: Although modern workplaces are generally fairer and more data-driven in their talent management practices than ever before, there’s still much progress to be made. Business leaders rejoice in the idea that their companies are meritocratic talent magnets, but the reality is that even when they are able to draw star performers into their companies, those stars will have to learn how to navigate the toxic and nepotistic side of any culture, including some basic degree of organizational politics.
Unsurprisingly, much career and executive coaching focuses on improving people’s soft and political skills, and a person’s political savvy has been found to promote their career success irrespective of their talents and technical skills. In general, the more contaminated and corrosive the culture of an organization, the more parasitic individuals will rise, much like bacteria thrive in contaminated environments. You can see this in any organization when there’s a clear gap between individuals’ career success and their actual performance and talents.
You can deal with this by being aware of the politics and partaking in them, though hopefully without selling your soul. In any event, it is naïve to think that you can let your talents speak for themselves. In fact, the more talented you are, the more enemies you will make — particularly in toxic and political organizations. And if things are hard to change, your best bet may be to change organizations, or at least units. Note that though all organizations are political, some are far less political than others.
Personal circumstances: The final reason is almost too obvious to mention, but in today’s ever-more-absorbing and 24/7 world of work, it’s easy to forget that people also have a personal and private life, and that no matter how engaged and talented they are, personal drawbacks and setbacks will often interfere with their career success.
This is why there is so much discussion of work-life balance (even today, when the boundaries between work and “life” have been eroded). Good bosses and supportive employers will want to understand your circumstances, and you can be sure they will have a vested interest in helping you deal with them so you can deliver in accordance with your talents, and feel grateful and committed to them in the long run.
In short, you can always assume that your talents are necessary, but not sufficient to excel and impress at work. Optimizing your job so that it fits with your interests, beliefs, and broader life activities, and being alert to the invisible social forces that govern the dynamics of organizations, will ultimately help you perform to the best of your capabilities.
Tomas Chamorro-Premuzic... is the Chief Innovation Officer at ManpowerGroup, a professor of business psychology at University College London and at Columbia University, and an associate at Harvard’s Entrepreneurial Finance Lab
