đź“ť usncan Note: The Colleague Who Performs For The Boss But Not The Team
Disclaimer: This content has been prepared based on currently trending topics to increase your awareness.
When employees manage up more than they collaborate, trust and innovation decline. Learn how leaders can reset what real performance means.
getty
Every workplace has at least one person whose primary skill is not collaboration but performance. Their energy is directed upward, toward impressing the boss, rather than outward, toward supporting the team. On the surface this looks like ambition and alignment, yet beneath it lies a pattern that can weaken trust and distort culture.
When colleagues invest more in managing perceptions than building relationships, the entire team feels the effects. Productivity slows, motivation slips, and innovation fades. What looks like loyalty to the leader often comes at the expense of the group’s cohesion.
Understanding this dynamic is essential for leaders who want teams to thrive. It is not about pointing fingers at one employee. It is about recognizing how organizational systems quietly reward performance that prioritizes hierarchy over collaboration.
The Psychology Of Managing Up
Managing up is not inherently negative. It can be a useful skill to align with a manager’s priorities and to anticipate what the leader needs. Problems arise when managing up becomes the centerpiece of someone’s working identity. Instead of balancing vertical and horizontal relationships, they channel nearly all of their energy toward being noticed by the person above them.
This often shows up as constant self-promotion, carefully staged updates, or exaggerated public praise of the boss. Psychologists call it impression management: the deliberate shaping of how others perceive you. While most professionals use some form of impression management, a small subset builds their entire reputation around it.
The upward performer studies what the leader values and mirrors it back. If the boss signals that long hours equal dedication, they are the last to leave. If the boss celebrates bold opinions, they speak first and loudest. They volunteer for projects that guarantee visibility, often without considering whether they are the right fit for the team.
What is missing is reciprocity. Requests from peers may go unanswered unless the boss is watching. Shared accomplishments are reframed as individual wins. Over time, colleagues notice that loyalty is vertical, not horizontal. What looks like commitment to the company is in reality commitment to optics.
The Hidden Costs To Teams
At first glance, upward performers can look like high achievers. They produce polished deliverables, they are quick to showcase progress, and they rarely miss a chance to stand out. For leaders under pressure, this kind of reliability feels comforting. Yet the costs to the broader team are significant.
Collaboration weakens when information is filtered through someone’s ambition. Team members hesitate to share openly if they believe credit will be redirected. Trust, which is the foundation of effective performance, becomes fragile.
Morale also suffers. Employees who feel their contributions are consistently overlooked may disengage. They stop volunteering ideas, knowing they will not receive recognition. Research consistently shows that perceived unfairness is one of the fastest routes to employee withdrawal.
Innovation declines in environments that reward performance for the boss. People are less likely to take creative risks when the incentive structure favors safe output that looks good in a presentation. Experimentation is discouraged, and incremental progress replaces bold exploration.
Perhaps most damaging, leadership gains a distorted picture of team health. The boss sees one polished performance and mistakes it for collective strength. The absence of visible conflict or resistance can feel like alignment, when in fact the team is quietly fragmenting.
Why Organizations Encourage The Wrong Behaviors
The persistence of this pattern is not the fault of one ambitious individual. It is the byproduct of how firms recognize and reward success. Too often, visibility is equated with value. Those who speak the loudest, volunteer most often, or frame their work in ways that flatter leadership become the ones promoted.
This creates a feedback loop. Others observe that upward performance pays off. Some imitate it, while others retreat in frustration. Either way, collaboration declines. The system rewards appearances rather than impact.
Leaders sometimes reinforce this dynamic without realizing it. They respond warmly to praise, they notice the volunteers for visible projects, and they reward the person who is always first to report progress. These small signals accumulate into a powerful message: loyalty directed at the boss is safer and more profitable than loyalty directed at the team.
The irony is that organizations believe they are rewarding merit. In reality, they are rewarding performance aimed at leaders themselves. This is especially acute in high-pressure settings where leaders crave reassurance. An employee who consistently mirrors the boss’s values feels dependable, even if the rest of the team quietly suffers.
Resetting The Definition Of Performance
Leaders can interrupt this cycle by expanding how they define and recognize performance. The first step is broadening sources of feedback. Do not rely solely on what is visible in public meetings. Ask team members privately who has been most supportive, who has shared knowledge, and who has helped others succeed. These conversations surface contributions that upward performers often overshadow.
Recognition must also shift from individual displays to collective outcomes. Publicly highlight team achievements and emphasize interdependence. When success is framed as a shared accomplishment, the incentive to perform only for the boss diminishes.
Another strategy is to reward behaviors that strengthen peer relationships. Acknowledge when someone mentors a colleague, provides cover during a busy period, or shares resources generously. Over time, these acts redefine what it means to stand out.
Finally, leaders need to separate loyalty from flattery. Agreement and reassurance can feel comforting, but they are not reliable indicators of commitment. Constructive dissent and thoughtful challenge often reveal deeper engagement. By creating space where alternative views are valued, leaders reduce the appeal of upward-only performance.
Teams thrive when recognition is distributed fairly, when collaboration is seen as a core competency, and when loyalty is measured by contribution to shared goals rather than personal allegiance to authority. Breaking the cycle requires intentional design, but the payoff is a culture where performance is real, not rehearsed.
