Skip to Main Content

Podcast

Podcast Ep 89 | Four Distinct Types of A-Players

December 20, 2021

What does the term A” play­er mean? The term can apply to any role in an orga­ni­za­tion, and is deter­mined by an indi­vid­u­al’s behav­iours and productivity.

A play­ers are typ­i­cal­ly under­stood to be high per­form­ers who fit your cul­ture, and peo­ple love work­ing with them. But with­in that cat­e­go­ry, four dif­fer­ent types have been iden­ti­fied, and there are mis­per­cep­tions about what an A play­er is. One size does not fit all.

In this pod­cast episode, Kevin Lawrence and Brad Giles dis­cuss four types of A‑players, and what lead­ers can do to under­stand and moti­vate them.

EPISODE TRAN­SCRIPT

Please note that this episode was tran­scribed using an AI appli­ca­tion and may not be 100% gram­mat­i­cal­ly cor­rect – but it will still allow you to scan the episode for key content.

Brad Giles 00:13

Hi, and wel­come to the Growth Whis­per­ers where every­thing that we talk about is build­ing endur­ing great busi­ness­es. Today as always, I’m joined by my co host, Kevin Lawrence. Hel­lo, Kevin, how you doing today?

Kevin Lawrence 00:40

Well, awe­some, Brad. Look­ing for­ward to our dis­cus­sion. Talk­ing about A play­ers is one of my favorite things.

Brad Giles 00:46

Tell me what’s your word or phrase of the day, Kevin?

Kevin Lawrence 01:02

Today is entre­pre­neur­ship. I’m down in the US this week. And every­where you go, the entre­pre­neur­ial juices are flow­ing in this coun­try. To me, my per­cep­tion is even more so than Cana­da. And the things I see hap­pens, like every­one’s an entre­pre­neur down here, whether it’s their own lit­tle chain of cof­fee shops or some­thing sub­stan­tial, just love the entre­pre­neur­ial spir­it in the Unit­ed States of Amer­i­ca. That’s my word of the day entrepreneurship.

Brad Giles 01:32

Well, you’re going to love mine, is some­one sell­ing to you? And that was I thought about that before, not on the spot. So if you’re in a meet­ing, maybe or if you’re deal­ing with any­one, maybe just stop, pause, think a moment, if some­one’s sell­ing to you is this per­son try­ing to get you to buy some­thing, not that there’s any­thing wrong with that. It’s what makes the world go around. But you know, a tiger is going to act like a tiger, you should not expect a sales­per­son to be doing an act­ing in a way that encour­ages you to buy, and just being con­scious of the moment. So if ever there was a stitch up between our two words of the day, it’s entre­pre­neuri­al­ism. So today, we’re talk­ing about the four dif­fer­ent types of A play­ers. Some peo­ple might know that there is four dif­fer­ent types of a play­ers. Because last week, we spoke about A play­ers and the cost of not hav­ing A play­ers in your team. But with­in the A play­er cat­e­go­ry, there are four dif­fer­ent types that you’ve got to know and under­stand as you apply it to your team.

Kevin Lawrence 02:55

Yes, so before we get into that, let’s reground peo­ple that maybe did­n’t lis­ten to the last episode, you can lis­ten to episode 88 for more on the rea­sons why you need to have A play­er’s and the cost of not, but we’ve defined a play­er, that is some­one who is an A lev­el fit on your cul­ture, and an A lev­el fit in terms or, or gets a lev­el results con­sis­tent­ly. So if you think of you know, a play­er being the top 90% So just like an A is, you know, in the US and a is 90% and high­er as a grade, and we want you know 90% or high­er on the per­for­mance 90% or high­er on the on the fit. A B play­er is some­one who does fit the cul­ture real­ly well. They just don’t con­sis­tent­ly get a grades on the on the qual­i­ty of their of their work, or hit­ting their dead­lines. What­ev­er’s they’re good. They’re just not great. So A is the ide­al B is just a low­er per­form­ing ver­sion of some­one who still fits that cul­ture. And then, and then we have some­thing called a C, which is sort of these lit­tle four box­es below because they don’t achieve the results as expect­ed, and they don’t fit the cul­ture. And then we got this real spe­cial one called a tox­ic A, that def­i­nite­ly gets awe­some results, but they don’t fit the cul­ture and hence their tox­i­c­i­ty, because they’re off cul­ture. And they cre­ate a lot of stress or dra­ma in the orga­ni­za­tion because they oper­ate under a dif­fer­ent belief sys­tem or a dif­fer­ent behav­ior sys­tem. And it’s chal­leng­ing for their coworkers.

Brad Giles 04:30

Most of the peo­ple in the orga­ni­za­tion prob­a­bly would­n’t want to sit next to a tox­ic guy, and they prob­a­bly would­n’t want to go to a meet­ing with a tox­ic guy.

Kevin Lawrence 04:38

Unless they want­ed to watch a lit­tle bit of enter­tain­ment and see what the tox­ic he can say today. So the root of it is that A play­ers are high per­form­ers who fit the cul­ture and you love, love, love love work­ing with them. But with­in that a cat­e­go­ry. There’s dif­fer­ent types and there’s mis­per­cep­tions because some peo­ple think and a play­er is As some­one who is super moti­vat­ed, and pro­motable and wants to rise up to the ranks and even­tu­al­ly be the CEO, and that’s a mis­con­cep­tion that we’ll deal with in a minute. So the four types, and real­ly, there’s three types plus one kick­er, and the kick­er is that tox­ic one. So we can deal with that one right away. That tox­ic A is the high per­form­ing jerk, or at least jerk in your com­pa­ny because they’re off cul­ture. And I’ll give an exam­ple of one who was­n’t so much a jerk. But this is it was a very nice woman in a com­pa­ny that I worked with. And she was a tox­ic A. So she was on the sup­port team of the com­pa­ny, and the sup­port team processed all the orders. And in their busiest time, that team would have to stay late at night to catch up because they had one month where they did I think 20% of their busi­ness. So this per­son came from more of a qual­i­ty union back­ground or labor back­ground. And, you know, they weren’t, they sort of said, well, I did my job, why would I stay late to help you do yours, because they were super pro­duc­tive. So let’s just say each per­son need­ed to process 20 orders in a day. Even in the busy time, she would get hers done by four o’clock. Yeah, but the rest were stay­ing till eight. And so it cre­at­ed a lot of ten­sion on the team. And I remem­ber this because I was work­ing with this com­pa­ny. And woman was bril­liant, she was out­stand­ing at her job. She may have been smarter than the darn CEO like this woman, she was amaz­ing. But one of the core val­ues of the com­pa­ny was team play­er. And Team Play­er means we all chip in and help each oth­er. And if there’s more work to be done, we we all stay togeth­er. Or we all leave ear­ly togeth­er, what­ev­er it hap­pened is, but it was this true togeth­er­ness of a team. So long sto­ry short, her man­ag­er talked to her a cou­ple of times about it. But she would­n’t she would­n’t budge, she would not get on board and be a part of the team. She said, Why No, I’m doing my work. That’s not my prob­lem, that they’re slow. So at the end of the day, she had to go because she was although incred­i­bly good at her job. And she was­n’t a jerk about it. She just refused to put in the time that was required to sup­port the team. And they live that core val­ues could so that’s an exam­ple ver­sus the arro­gant sales per­son or the you know, all the oth­er sto­ries we know about tox­ic case. It just was­n’t was off cul­ture and was­n’t will­ing to be a part of what the com­pa­ny was about. So that’s the talk. Okay, we can take that off the list. There’s tons of them.

Brad Giles 07:36

But they are not sales­peo­ple, nec­es­sar­i­ly. It’s very easy to asso­ciate a tox­ic guy with a sales­per­son. And there’s some great a play­er sales peo­ple who aren’t tox­ic. Don’t get me wrong, but just don’t think about tox­ic as pre­dom­i­nant­ly being a sales­per­son or in the sales field.

Kevin Lawrence 07:55

I have seen loads of fun­ny job. But I’ve seen I’ve seen tox­ic a truck dri­vers, one of my clients had a tox­ic a truck dri­ver, they deliv­ered stuff from Van­cou­ver through to the rest of Cana­da back when we had roads, no don’t work. That’s anoth­er sto­ry. But they would dri­ve and in the dead of win­ter weath­er was incred­i­bly tough con­di­tions, he would dri­ve the semi trail­er over the moun­tains in any weath­er any­time, nev­er dam­aged the truck. Best main­tained truck, clean­est truck. Only a slight prob­lem is that my client has their name on the sides of the trail­ers and the trucks, they will get two or three calls per week about him and his aggres­sive dri­ving on the road. So you’re a brand and you’ve got your name on the side, and you’ve got a very aggres­sive dri­ver who’s the best dri­ver you have. But he’s also very aggres­sive and you get a lot of com­plaints. That’s a tox­ic and he’s amaz­ing. But that’s not what the com­pa­nies the com­pa­ny has a warm heart­ed culture.

Brad Giles 08:57

It’s not it’s not a sus­tain­able posi­tion. Like you know how long he can’t, he can’t keep doing that for­ev­er. Those calls will add up. You can but there’s a cost

Kevin Lawrence 09:06

There’s and also we know what that kind of stuff at some point there like­ly could be an inci­dent which we don’t wish on any­one else that stuff hap­pens. So but let’s get into the three types of a play­ers and they’re not all want­i­ng to be the CEO. That’s the lit­tle clue. So once you’re once you kick us off for the first one of the of the three.

Brad Giles 09:30

Yeah, so we’ve cov­ered off tox­ic. Now let’s look at the three with­in a quad­rant. In oth­er words, they’re high on core val­ues, and they’re high on pro­duc­tiv­i­ty. So the first one is what we call an a one and a one. So that means that they’re a great fit, they’re a great fit, and they’re not nec­es­sar­i­ly pro­motable, so they’re nev­er going to esca­late into oth­er roles, but in that role, the great on the back I’ll use an eighth grade on the pro­duc­tiv­i­ty. You can, they’re just sol­id, they’re just, they’re just like the beat in the back­ground, they’re always going to per­form, you can rely on them. But when you look at them, they’re not nec­es­sar­i­ly going to take on anoth­er high­er role. You can’t real­ly pro­mote them. And you, you want a lot of these peo­ple in your busi­ness. It does­n’t mean that you can’t get the oth­er ones but but if you can get rid of the bees in the sea­son, the tox­ic guys to get these peo­ple in, then that’s a great way. They’re the dependable.

Kevin Lawrence 10:38

Yeah, and there’s lots and they’re often mis­un­der­stood. Because some peo­ple think, well, if you don’t want to get pro­mot­ed, and you don’t want to rise up to the next lev­el, you’re not an A play­er. It’s not true. And a play­er some­one’s excep­tion­al at the role. And they may or may not want to. So these, these a ones are out­stand­ing. I know tons of them, and they’re won­der­ful. Now, as the com­pa­ny grows, some­times they end up if they’re two lay­ers away from the CEO, over time, they might be three, or four, depend­ing on how the com­pa­ny grows. Because they gen­er­al­ly don’t grow in their role. They mas­ter their role, for exam­ple. And my father, when I was grow­ing up was a mechan­ic, a karmic auto mechan­ic, he was an A play­er in that role. He was out­stand­ing, high qual­i­ty work integri­ty, got the job done, right took good care of the cus­tomers. But he had zero inter­est in mov­ing through the com­pa­ny, he would stay in that role. Well, he did for his whole career, as long as as long as he worked. And that was the role that he was hap­py in. I was speak­ing with a guy on the week­end, who was an air­craft, it was a crew leader, for bowl­ing build­ing air­planes. Yeah. And he led crews there for close to 20 years. And he stayed lead­ing the crews for 20 years, his role did­n’t change a whole bunch, he just helped to build a lot of air­planes, and he was hap­py and they were hap­py. So out­stand­ing, noth­ing wrong with them. Only thing you got to watch with these peo­ple a sus­tained make sure their skills stay rel­e­vant enough for the role, because they’re not as ambi­tious, you got to make sure they con­tin­ue to grow enough just to stay to stay in that a spot.

Brad Giles 12:15

So do you want to take us on to num­ber two, what is the sec­ond type?

Kevin Lawrence 12:21

Two is some­one who can move up a lev­el, maybe it’s two, but gen­er­al­ly, they can move up a bit. They’re not going to go from being you know, a super­vi­sor to the CEO, nec­es­sar­i­ly, but they can def­i­nite­ly move up a lev­el. And that’s the kind of cat­e­go­ry that we put them in. So these are peo­ple this could be, you know, one of your sales peo­ple who has the poten­tial to be that sales man­ag­er. And he’s, he or she is one of those rare peo­ple that you can see could do that, because that’s a hard bridge to cross or, or maybe they’re run­ning one team. But they might be able to run two teams, or they’re run­ning one loca­tion, they might be able to run two loca­tions or so it could go in there respon­si­bly, could go side­ways, I eat more breadth, or they could move up a lev­el. And maybe it’s some­one who’s a direc­tor is your direc­tor of finance, that could be your CFO, he could move up or she or he or she it could be your you know, your your VP of sales or your VP of Oper­a­tions, that could be the CEO. So there’s, there’s, you can see that there’s, there’s anoth­er step in them for sure. And it’s a com­bi­na­tion of cat capa­bil­i­ty and ambi­tion that’s that that exists.

Brad Giles 13:35

And not nec­es­sar­i­ly today, not even per­haps in the next few months or even year. But you can clear­ly see that if I can invest in this per­son, this per­son has the capa­bil­i­ty to lead a team or to lead a team of teams or what­ev­er it might be, we can push them one lev­el up con­fi­dent­ly. And so an AI is a great fit. Appar­ent­ly, an A one is a great fit, but they’re not nec­es­sar­i­ly pro­motable, but then an A to is pro­motable, per­haps one level.

Kevin Lawrence 14:06

At this point, that’s what you could see. Yeah. And then there’s, there’s, then there’s these ones called a three is, and this would be the kinds of peo­ple that, you know, you and I would have been through­out our careers, because we’re super moti­vat­ed and dri­ven and will­ing to real­ly, you know, push ahead and do that work for what­ev­er pos­i­tive or neg­a­tive rea­son. And these are peo­ple that have high per­me­abil­i­ty, and it’s at least you know, two lev­els or more, and you can spot these peo­ple com­ing through orga­ni­za­tions. And you can see them when they’re, you know, if you’re talk­ing an orga­ni­za­tion of a few 100 peo­ple, you can you can you see them and you hear about them, you know, they’re two or three or four or five lay­ers down the orga­ni­za­tion and they just keep, you know, grad­u­al­ly ris­ing up and ris­ing up. And it’s, again, it’s a com­bi­na­tion of com­pe­tence and desire to progress. in their careers, and these are your future lead­ers, these are your future exec­u­tives, often some­times they’re the future can­di­dates to be in that CEO role. Now, some peo­ple will call them their high poten­tials, all kinds of oth­er things.

Brad Giles 15:13

That’s exact­ly what I was gonna say. Some peo­ple call them hypos”, or high poten­tials. And maybe they’ve got a pro­gram around that. Maybe that cap­tures that a twos pro­motable one lev­el and that a threes pro­motable two plus levels.

Kevin Lawrence 15:30

There’s a spe­cial flag, I want to call out on these ones that we have to be care­ful. Because some­times these peo­ple are real­ly keen to grow, and they’re demon­strat­ing all the right things. But we can have a ten­den­cy some­times to over­pow­er them. And over pro­mo­tion is a chal­lenge because you see this per­son who’s gone from, you know, an A play­er, a play­er, a play­er, oh, B or B minus, because we pro­mote and some­times it works. Some­times you pro­mote peo­ple and they grow into it. And some­times it does­n’t. That’s why we deeply scru­ti­nize pro­mo­tions before we do them to make sure that peo­ple are ready. And we’ll talk about that a lit­tle bit more when we talk about how do you assess where they’re at, it’s in our next sec­tion here. And let’s get our­selves in trouble.

Brad Giles 16:17

Let’s remem­ber that an A play­er is in the top 10% of can­di­dates at the pay rate that you offer. So these peo­ple aren’t get­ting paid any more than their co-work­ers who could be B’s or C’s or even tox­ic owes. There is a defined role, you could be pay­ing $85,000 for a role. As an exam­ple, these peo­ple will be get­ting paid the same amount as their co work­ers. That’s a real­ly impor­tant, we’re not say­ing you need to pay a lot more. We’re say­ing with­in the cohort of peo­ple at that pay rate. These peo­ple are in the top 10%. And then with­in that top 10% Are these three sec­tions that we’ve iden­ti­fied. They’re a great fit, but not pro­motable. They’re pro­motable one lev­el, and then they pro­motable two plus levels.

Kevin Lawrence 17:03

Yeah. And so just to clar­i­fy, by the way, that’s top 10% of the peo­ple out­side of your com­pa­ny, you ide­al­ly want way more than 10%. In this par­tic­u­lar, yeah, in the mar­ket, in the mar­ket, yes, in this cat­e­go­ry. So these high­ly pro­motable peo­ple, these are the peo­ple that you know, you want to invest in and help them grow, but just some­times we’re so enam­oured with them, is that we over pro­mote them. And then we cre­ate a prob­lem. And it’s very, very hard for all of our egos awe­some, myself and your­self includ­ed abroad, is that when you get to that high­er lev­el, to then go from being the VP to being not being the direc­tor, or from being the man­ag­er back to being the tech­ni­cian, what­ev­er it hap­pens to be. And, and that would go into our next piece of how do we assess where they’re at, relates into pro­mo­tions as well. And that’s, you know, the the best tech­nique ever, to one, see where they stand. And also to see if if the pro­motable type that they’re ready for the next role is give them some projects that are con­sis­tent with the next role and see how they do. So I’ll give you an exam­ple. We were work­ing on suc­ces­sion for a CEO, I was work­ing with a group in the Mid­dle East. And we had two can­di­dates that were cur­rent­ly had the poten­tial to be the back­up plan, and suc­ces­sion plan for the CEO. We had con­ver­sa­tions about it, the CEO, we talked about it, the chair­man talked about it. And as a result, we went and gave some addi­tion­al projects with the CEO, I did a lit­tle bit of coach­ing with some minor, just help­ing them to set­tle their goals of what they were going to do, includ­ing feed­back from the CEO, their boss, gave them both projects to help with their growth towards that CEO role. Know­ing that could be five or 10 years in the future, but we were still just, you know, lay­ing ground­work for them to get there. And then after a cou­ple of quar­ters, it was real­ly clear there was only one con­tender because and you nev­er know who it’s going to be. But they were both giv­en oppor­tu­ni­ties to grow in their respec­tive roles. One went click click, click and just rose up, moved up, you know, two or three notch­es in their role in nine months. Yep. The oth­er one actu­al­ly did­n’t move a bit. And there was one key thing that oth­er exec­u­tive needs to do. He just could­n’t could­n’t make it hap­pen, which is okay. He’s he was thriv­ing in his role. Yeah, but But we knew for sure, at that moment, there was only one contender.

Brad Giles 19:34

Yeah, for sure. And so at every quar­ter­ly and annu­al off­set that we facil­i­tate, and hope­ful­ly peo­ple par­tic­i­pate in, one of the out­comes of that is what are the top three to five pri­or­i­ties, or OKRs for each indi­vid­ual in the next 90 days? Yeah. And so that is, that is real­ly what you’re allud­ing to, I think, is that give them help them to take on pri­or­i­ties, projects with­in that are­na that are going to chal­lenge them, or give them a taste of the next lev­el, see how they per­form. And then in a, in a non overt way gives you the oppor­tu­ni­ty to real­ly try before you buy.

Kevin Lawrence 20:23

Yes. So if if you’ve got an exec­u­tive, for exam­ple, that is, you know, you’re not sure they’re going to do real­ly well in deal­ing with a lot of con­flict when it comes to deal­ing with your ven­dors, right, maybe nego­ti­a­tions or con­flict, well, get them on the team that does­n’t nego­ti­a­tion, and the next time and give them a roll and see how they do. Yeah, like if in doubt, test it out. And that’s what we should be doing, deep­er and use a top rat­ing score­card, eval­u­ate them against it, and see where they stand on dif­fer­ent com­pe­ten­cies. That’s the ulti­mate. But the sim­ple prac­tice is just test it. And in many ways, it’s a test dri­ve for them to try it and see how they like it. Because a lot of peo­ple are moti­vat­ed and want the big title or the big job. But many peo­ple aren’t suit­ed for the work. So some­times we can eval­u­ate that some­times we just got to give them a chance to show us and or them­selves, and see how they like it, for exam­ple, or one exec­u­tive, we’re work­ing with it, you know, the deal­ing with con­flict is some­thing that we haven’t seen a good enough strength on that the per­son still thinks they can do it. It’s not like­ly, but we’re gonna put them in sit­u­a­tions that have high con­flict, and get them to resolve it and see how they do at resolv­ing it. And then see how they enjoy hav­ing that being 20% of their job.

Brad Giles 21:46

Yeah, I’ve got anoth­er sim­i­lar sit­u­a­tion where there’s a lead­er­ship team mem­ber. And we real­ly need this lead­er­ship team mem­ber to step up to the next lev­el. But this indi­vid­ual has prob­lems del­e­gat­ing, so they’re tak­ing it all on, and they haven’t been able to hire below them to give them the band­width. And, and so yeah, we’re in a bit of a quandary. Now it’s like, has this per­son reached their ceil­ing? And if they have, then we need to deal with it. But where we’re, you know, we’re work­ing on the pri­or­i­ties or the projects that we’re giv­ing them to see, is it a struc­tur­al issue? Is it an issue where they can’t find the time because of some oth­er rea­son, we’re giv­ing them every ben­e­fit of the doubt, ben­e­fit of the doubt, but we’re try­ing to fig­ure out what’s real­ly going on here.

Kevin Lawrence 22:40

And you unpack all the vari­ables that when I when I told you about the two exec­u­tives in the Mid­dle East, and one of them was a del­e­ga­tion project? Yes, it han­dover this part of your role to some­one else, so that you can move and focus on this oth­er part. And they weren’t. That is an example.

Kevin Lawrence 23:06

So we’re talk­ing about is the four types A play­ers, right, the first one is a tox­ic A, that’s the high per­form­ing jerk, that is chal­leng­ing, because they’re off cul­ture. And although they do great results that cre­ate a lot of dra­ma. Those aren’t ones we want to keep around. Those are the ones we need to deal with me to give him a chance to step up and fit the cul­ture. But usu­al­ly they don’t, and they won’t, but still gonna try and if not, you know, find help them find a new home some­where else where they can be a bet­ter fit.

Brad Giles 23:36

Yeah. And so that I too, can move up one lev­el the aid to the pro­motable, you can look at them in a row, and you think, yeah, I can def­i­nite­ly see them at the next lev­el, not today. But I can see kind of a bit of a path to get them there. But prob­a­bly not too much fur­ther than that, at least in the fore­see­able future, I can’t real­ly see that. Where­as the fourth type that I three, you can see they’re just blaz­ing a trail and a trail of suc­cess. They are tak­ing some­thing on the exe­cut­ing it amaz­ing. And you can see if they took on the next lev­el, they would nail that. And you can just see they can just keep on stack­ing on on those wins. At least peo­ple are a lit­tle bit like a horse with a horn, as I say to my daugh­ter, which she calls a uni­corn. But they’re not that rare, but they’re real­ly are quite rare. But know­ing that you’ve got one is real­ly, it’s good to know. And it’s good to be able to tai­lor the work set to them.

Kevin Lawrence 24:44

We skipped over the a one and a one is a great fit for the job as is. They don’t know. They don’t want to or they’re not capa­ble of being pro­mot­ed to the next lev­el. But they could be excel­lent at that job for the next decade or two. The key thing we wrapped up with is you just want to test them in, to test them to cal­i­brate to see which cat­e­go­ry they’re in, whether they say they want to grow, whether they say they want to move up or not. You can give them projects and see how they han­dle it because they might not know until they actu­al­ly do it themselves.

So this is the Growth Whis­per­ers — thanks for lis­ten­ing. You know, Brad and I both have newslet­ters, which you can find on our web­sites. For the YouTube ver­sion, go to youtube​.com If you have any requests for the show, you can also send a note to either of us, but to reach Brad and his newslet­ter evo­lu­tion part​ners​.com​.au and myself Kevin Lawrence at Lawrence and co​.com. So there you have it. A play­er’s four dif­fer­ent types, three that real­ly count in a pos­i­tive sense. Any­ways, we wish you well with that. Have an excel­lent week­end. We’ll see you next week.


Lawrence & Co’s work focuses on sustainable and enhanced growth for you and your business. Our diverse and experienced group of advisors can help your leaders and executive teams stay competitive through the use of various learning tools including workshops, webinars, executive retreats, or one-to-one coaching.

We help high-achieving leaders to have it all – a great business and a rewarding life. Contact us for simple and impactful advice. No BS. No fluff.