Who This Article Is For
- Owners concerned that their strongest employees do not stay
- Leaders facing unfairness or declining workplace standards
- Owners who want to review organizational culture itself
How Tolerated Low Standards Drive Strong Employees Away
Use Gresham’s law as a workplace analogy to identify neglected standards, silenced concerns, blame, and the changes needed to retain conscientious employees.
Published
Retain Conscientious Employees by Rewarding Good Conduct and Addressing Problems
Repeated departures involve more than compensation alone. When low-standard behavior is left unaddressed, conscientious employees can be the first to leave.
Gresham's law provides an analogy: lower-quality behavior remains while higher-quality contributions move elsewhere. Owners need to examine the environment determining what stays and what leaves, alongside trying to retain an individual.
Gresham's Law as an Organizational Analogy
Gresham's law is associated with “bad money drives out good.” Applied as an analogy, it describes how tolerated low-standard behavior can leave higher-standard workers without a suitable place.
Here, good and bad money describe the quality of behavior spreading through the organization. They should not be used to label people's inherent worth.
Examples of good contributions include:
- Going beyond minimum standards for customers
- Addressing problems when they are noticed
- Sharing mistakes and using them for improvement
- Acting for the team's overall results
Examples of harmful behavior include:
- Doing the minimum while avoiding responsibility
- Blaming others when problems occur
- Adjusting numbers through temporary fixes
- Taking advantage of others' effort
When evaluation ignores the difference, good contributions decline and harmful behavior remains.
Warning Signs in Organizations Losing Strong Employees
A company may seem operational while its internal standards weaken.
Looking Only at Results and Ignoring the Process
Numbers-only evaluation dismisses how results are produced. Conscientious effort and forceful methods that generate figures are then treated alike.
Serious employees begin feeling unrewarded. Capable people often notice this unfairness quickly.
Penalizing People Who Speak Up
People who identify a problem receive difficult follow-up work. Only those proposing improvements become exhausted. Honest views then disappear.
Recognizing and describing problems has value. When that action brings a disadvantage, thoughtful people stop speaking.
The workplace becomes superficially quiet while problems merely become less visible.
Consequences include:
- Honest views disappear from meetings
- Nobody proposes improvements
- Mistakes remain unaddressed
- Dissatisfaction appears only through resignations
Silence can signal deterioration beneath apparent stability.
See Creating Meetings Where People Can Speak Up for changing that pattern. It explains drawing out participants' views before the leader states a conclusion.
Searching for Someone to Blame
After a problem, preventing recurrence matters. When blame comes first, people stop telling the truth.
Those accepting responsibility lose out, while hiding, avoiding, and remaining silent become ways to survive.
Self-Protection Becomes Stronger Than Initiative
When only failed attempts receive blame, people stop trying. Doing nothing becomes the safest option.
| Condition | Organizational consequence |
|---|---|
| Attempts are not recognized | New proposals disappear |
| Failures alone receive blame | Self-protection takes priority |
| Responsibility is pursued aggressively | Problems are concealed |
| Learning is not retained | Mistakes repeat |
People motivated to grow increasingly look outside the organization.
What Happens Before Conscientious People Leave?
Before leaving, capable employees gradually lose expectations of the organization. The change may be invisible externally.
First comes discomfort. Serious effort loses out while low standards are overlooked, creating a sense of unfairness.
Next comes an attempt to improve things: speaking to a supervisor, changing a system, or demonstrating a better example. Without change, disappointment follows.
Finally comes silence. Someone who concludes that speaking will change nothing stops fighting internally and looks toward outside opportunities.
What Owners Need to Do
Create an environment where capable people can remain before focusing only on persuading them to stay.
Define and Evaluate Good Behavior
Write down the behavior the company values. Evaluate how people act alongside their outcomes.
Examples include:
- Honest, considerate responses
- Repeatable work methods
- Contributions to the team
- Sharing and improving problems
Unclear expectations allow standards to deteriorate.
Address Harmful Behavior
Short-term results do not justify behavior that damages the organization. Silence about dishonesty, responsibility avoidance, and exhausting others communicates acceptance.
Firmness protects organizational standards. Removing people is not an end in itself.
Become the Standard Yourself
The owner's behavior shapes the atmosphere. If you expect integrity, demonstrate it first.
For example:
- Acknowledge mistakes
- Face inconvenient information
- Protect people who speak up
- Evaluate people beyond short-term outcomes
Systems alone cannot change the organization without that stance.
SpreadSite is a no-code website builder that lets you create, publish, and update a website from Google Sheets using ready-made templates.
To introduce your company and services through a website that is simple to maintain, give SpreadSite a try!
Build a website with SpreadSite →
About the Author
Thank you for reading! I develop and operate SpreadSite, a service for creating websites from spreadsheets. For people with limited time and money.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Should an employee with problematic behavior be dismissed immediately?
A: First explain the standards clearly and request improvement. Consider further responses if change does not occur. The central point is to avoid ignoring the issue.
Q: How should we handle someone who delivers results but harms colleagues?
A: Leaving the behavior unaddressed spreads the wrong standard. Short-term results may come at the cost of long-term trust and capable employees.
Q: Can the same pattern occur in a small company?
A: Yes. One person's behavior can have an especially large effect on the atmosphere when there are fewer people.
Q: Where should rebuilding begin?
A: Clarify what the company rewards and what it will not tolerate. Begin by having the owner follow those standards.
