The imprecise terms we use to describe the quality of workplace performance reflect limited thinking on what makes for strong work. Such blind spots, in turn, constrain our means to improve. As champions of human capability, HR can shift the narrative, and thus thinking and practice, to make workplaces better.
Language of performance
When we strip back the various activities of managers, and especially in HR, one overarching imperative of leadership is to secure collaborative performance across the organisation.
Performance is defined, evaluated and graded against countless yardsticks – almost every firm has its own way of doing things. At the same time, and when push comes to shove, lines are drawn between performance that is effective and ineffective, desirable and undesirable, good and bad.
Words that perform badly
In days gone by, when discussing performance that fell short, we spoke of a ‘weakness’. It was usual to see a deficiency of strength, a flaw in a person’s character, a defect or a shortcoming. The language suggests immutability, something we cannot change.
In our now supposedly enlightened era, we speak of a ‘development area’. Whilst the euphemism rightly implies the possibility of change, everyone knows that development areas are conceived by managers and employees alike, if perhaps not everyone in HR, as failings.
Similarly, development areas are commonly judged away from the performer: via the annual 360, in discussion with a manager or when HR is involved to fix a problem. The yardstick often feels external, and blame – implicit or assumed – tempers a person’s enthusiasm for change.
Talk about ‘development areas’ in a room of colleagues and people invariably chuckle. As management jargon goes, the phrase is not as ridiculous as ‘every problem is an opportunity’. Still, in practice the contrivance does little to open up new avenues of thought.
The overdone strength
Consider, on the other hand, the notion of an ‘overdone strength’. Our experience with teams that have ambitions to turn the corner shows how this reframing encourages everyone to talk about, think of, and act on performance in new and relevant ways.
An ‘overdone strength’ captures the notion inherent in ‘weakness’, that a behaviour is not quite right. The term also brings optimism that something can be done: indeed, the distance back from overdone to done feels shorter than the leap implied in the black-versus-white of a ‘development area’.
The concept goes further. The emphasis on ‘strength’ lessens the sting of blame that attends the usual conversation on shortfalls. After all, we are now talking about behaviours that an individual means to deploy with positive intent, yet which are perceived negatively for some reason.
Performance and collaboration are two sides of the same coin.
Herein lies the great power of the idea: a behaviour is deemed overdone for a reason. This reason is context. Context is the commonly overlooked factor in performance – and also in how performance is seen by others and judged by the organisation.
In general, team members strive to do their best. Problems arise when they bring their strengths with a frequency, duration or intensity that does not fit with the situation. Or, when their approach or motives, and so expectations and needs, differ from those of their colleagues.
Whilst not all problematic behaviours are overdone strengths – consider bullying, for example, or lack of experience – the idea accounts for many issues that emerge as people advance in their roles and/or encounter novel contexts.
Strengths in context
Here are four examples of strengths and their overdone equivalents, based on the Crucial Learning Strengths Deployment Inventory (known as the ‘SDI’), which we at Marble Brook use to help teams explore their differences:
- Risk-taking overdone is reckless
- Modest overdone is self-effacing
- Methodical overdone is rigid
- Option-oriented is indecisive
Broadly, two main factors provide the context for performance at work:
- The situation – corporate culture, circumstances and objectives
- The people – personalities, goals and relationships
Performance and collaboration are two sides of the same coin.
The knowledge that everyone brings different strengths, and that sometimes people miss the context and do too much or too little […] is liberating.
Examples of overdone strengths
Differences of opinion and the interpersonal conflicts that arise from overdone strengths will be familiar to anyone who has worked in a complex workplace.
Risk-taking versus reckless
For example, I argue that launching a leadership model in the run-up to Christmas is helpful risk-taking, as it positions managers for the new year. Still, you believe this is reckless in that colleagues need a break after a tough year, and no one’s attention will be on work.
Modest versus self-effacing
I think it modest to allow our HR business partners to present their plans for 2026 to the executive committee. The CEO, however, worries I am self-effacing: I am failing to show the leadership required to pull everyone’s ideas into a coherent strategy.
Methodical versus Rigid
Committed to doing the best for the company, I am methodical in how I analyse the data from all employee systems. But, the head of sales sees me as rigid: I am both missing the big picture and stopping decisions that might open up new markets.
Option-oriented versus indecisive
To help translate new company values into behaviours, I plan workshops that involve junior employees, seeking to be option-oriented. The chief people officer says I am indecisive: the project has dragged on for too long.
Through this lens, colleagues see how evaluations of performance depend heavily on context; and how each person’s values and ambitions encourage ’I am right, you are wrong’ thinking. This understanding of characters and context helps managers navigate workplace complexity.
The knowledge that everyone brings different strengths, and that sometimes people miss the context and do too much or too little – albeit with good intentions – is liberating.
How HR can liberate performance
HR will do well to set aside talk of ‘development areas’ to champion the language, thinking and practice of ‘overdone strengths’.
We at Marble Brook see how this frees team members to have an open dialogue, understand their colleagues, value diverse contributions, and commit to behaviours that aid cooperation.
