Choose Your People Wisely

We have known since kindergarten that who you sit next to matters. If we are honest with ourselves, we have known it at school and at work too. The kid or adult you sat beside likely played a role in shaping your habits, your focus, and occasionally your detention record. Maybe that explains my school performance. Or maybe I was that kid.

It turns out that dynamic does not disappear with age.

Research from the Kellogg School of Management confirmed it about a decade ago with some fairly staggering findings. They found that if you sit within roughly 25 feet of a high performer, your own performance can increase by about 15 percent. Their habits, pace and standards spill over into the people around them.

That is the good news.

The sobering news is this.

If you sit within similar proximity to a toxic coworker, the negative impact can be roughly twice that magnitude. In other words, the drag created by toxic behaviour is significantly stronger than the lift created by excellence.

And separate “bad apple” research backs this up, showing that one toxic individual can reduce overall team performance by 30 to 40 percent. Yep, not good.

So proximity is not neutral. It shapes standards, behaviours and outcomes.

And this is where the myth of the “toxic genius” starts to unravel.

We have all seen it. The technically brilliant individual who hits their numbers and delivers impressive output, but leaves a trail of strained relationships, lowered morale and frustration behind them. The person who is defended because “they get results,” as though results exist in isolation from the system around them.

But the toxic genius is just one archetype there are many other corrosive styles that also impact performance. The truth is simple. You are not a high performer if you do not make other people better.

If your presence consistently reduces the performance, wellbeing or standards of the people around you, the negative impact on the business is real, even if your personal metrics look fine.

Now, before we start labelling every difficult colleague as toxic (and I get it, it is tempting…), it is worth slowing down. Not everyone who disagrees with you, challenges you or has an off day is a rodent to be exterminated. We all have moments where we are stressed, abrupt or less self-aware than we would like.

One of the studies defined toxic workers quite narrowly as those whose behaviour was serious enough to warrant dismissal. The other highlighted recurring patterns such as being aggressively dismissive of others’ ideas, consistently letting others carry the load while contributing very little, or repeatedly injecting doubt and pessimism into the team’s ability to succeed.

In other words, not someone who irritates you. Someone whose behaviour, over time, erodes the standards of the group.

The Kellogg research then went on to talk about managing seating and proximity. And yes, you could technically move desks. But no, I am not encouraging we use this research to put Johnny 26 feet away from all high performers and call it a day (although wouldn’t that be so much easier..)

We need to deal with Johnny.

Because culture is not solved with a seating plan (damn..) It is a set of norms that are reinforced every day through what we tolerate and what we challenge.

So what do you actually do?

Before you rush to remove someone, there are some uncomfortable but necessary questions to sit with.

Are they coachable? Do they genuinely understand the impact their behaviour is having on others, or do they explain it away as everyone else being too sensitive? This speaks to self-awareness. Some people, particularly those that haven't had lots of feedback before can make really positive strides once they are aware and get some guidance.

The next question is whether they actually want to change?

Because unless someone truly understands their impact and wants to adjust how they show up, there will be no shift. It is very hard to help someone evolve when the behaviours causing the damage are the same behaviours that once helped them succeed. Sometimes those patterns were reinforced early in their career. Sometimes they were shaped long before work, embedded deeply in how they learned to navigate the world. At that point you are not just tweaking a habit. You are trying to unpick something that feels part of their identity.

As a leader, this is one of the hardest challenges you will face. People can change. With insight, ownership and the right support, real progress is possible. But it is rarely quick, and it is never effortless. The danger is not in believing someone can improve. The danger is in persevering for too long when the evidence of change simply is not there. At that point the emotional toll rises, the time investment compounds, and the cost spreads beyond the individual. Every hour spent managing what is not shifting is an hour taken from strategy, growth and the wider team. And none of us gets that time back.

And then the harder question. Even if they could change, has too much damage already been done? Has trust eroded to the point where recovery will be extremely difficult, no matter how much effort is applied?

And then there is the timing.

That's why early feedback is crucial. Not just about the behaviour itself, but about what you start to notice around it. Often it begins with a feeling rather than a formal complaint. The odd comment. A couple of people mentioning something that doesn’t quite sit right with you.

If you’ve led for any length of time, you know that intuition. That small internal voice that something is off.

That is usually the moment to lean in, not lean back.

One of the biggest mistakes we make as leaders is hoping it will sort itself out. I have done it. Most leaders who have been around long enough have done it. You tell yourself that the person is just adjusting and its ok to ruffle some feathers. You wait for something clearer. Meanwhile the pattern strengthens and the impact spreads.

The longer behaviour and the reactions to it go unaddressed, the harder it becomes to shift. Early, honest conversations may be uncomfortable, but they are far easier than repairing a team dynamic that has already absorbed months of erosion. Not only that, but the early conversations is the best way to help that individual succeed.

The best leaders I know do not surround themselves with people who simply deliver results for them. They build teams full of people who are strong in different ways, people who stretch thinking and make the standard higher for everyone. That takes confidence, and it takes clarity about the culture you are trying to create.

And this is not just a leadership conversation.

For students choosing friends, for young professionals picking flatmates or teammates, the same principle applies. If you consistently spend time around people who complain, blame and lower expectations, over time that becomes normal. Not because you lack backbone, but because we adapt to what is around us.

Equally, spend enough time around people who take responsibility and push themselves, and you will find yourself doing the same.

Who you sit next to shapes you more than you think.

Talent influences others over time. Toxic behaviour can undo that influence much faster.

So it might be worth quietly looking around your desk, your friendship circle or your leadership team and asking yourself a couple of questions.

Who is within 25 feet of me? Who am I surrounding myself with.

And if you are leading, who on my team is showing early signs of behaviour that could become corrosive if left alone?

You could try waving some sage around the office and hoping the energy shifts. It might make the place smell impressive for half an hour. It might also be quite fun albeit people would think that you have become totally unhinged (although if you are surrounded by too many toxic people, maybe you actually have…)

But you will probably get better results by trusting your intuition early, having the conversation sooner than feels comfortable, and being clear about the standards you are willing to protect.

The people around you are always setting a standard. At work or in life, the real question is whether they’re lifting you up, or slowly lowering the bar.