Managerial 80/100 Rule: Balancing Employee Freedom and Structure
By Joe Way, PhD, CTS
Let’s be honest, managing employees is hard. It is a skill of its own. One of the most critical skills I’ve learned is the distinction between managing high-performing employees and low-performers. It may seem counterintuitive, but I’d rather receive 80% from a high performer than 100% from a lower performer. Understanding this has dramatically reshaped my management approach and employee development.
Why would I settle for what seems to be less than optimal output? The answer’s not in the raw output but in the potential, flexibility, and creativity that high performers bring to the table—even when they’re not operating at full capacity. The crucial difference is that high performers inherently deliver a greater overall value to the organization. Their 80% often surpasses a lower performer’s 100% in terms of impact, innovation, and efficiency. I’ve found that their bad days often far exceed the best days of lower-performing staff. The effort it takes to bring low-performers up to speed often makes the juice not worth the squeeze.
High performers operate differently. They thrive in environments that offer autonomy, opportunities for growth, and no micromanagement. Conversely, lower-performing employees frequently require clear guidelines, structured environments, consistent oversight, and well-defined boundaries to ensure productivity and task completion. Recognizing this duality is central to effective management.
High-performing employees are typically driven by internal motivations like mastery, the desire to succeed, personal fulfillment, autonomy, and purpose. They require an environment that respects their skills and allows them to experiment, take calculated risks, and innovate without fear of failure. For these individuals, structure can sometimes be stifling and detrimental. The ability to define their environment, knowing when their best comes out; it flows from the ability to be flexible. It’s about the deliverables, the what’s, not the how’s.
Giving high performers the freedom to set their goals, manage their schedules, and approach tasks creatively, unlocks their full potential. A high performer’s productivity isn’t linear or static—it’s dynamic, shaped by their perceived freedom and empowerment. When constrained too tightly, their enthusiasm and innovation diminish, leading to reduced overall productivity, even if on the surface, they appear to meet expectations. For example, consider a great programmer, graphic artist, or AV technician who regularly finds creative solutions to complex technical challenges. Mandating overly specific procedures or excessive oversight can kill their enthusiasm and limit their ability to explore innovative solutions. Conversely, giving them broader objectives, fewer procedural boundaries, and more decision-making autonomy can lead to breakthroughs that benefit the organization far beyond standard operational targets.
Lower-performing employees, on the other hand, usually benefit significantly from structured work environments. They perform best when given clear directions, detailed processes, specific performance indicators, and consistent follow-up. This structure helps them maintain focus, understand expectations clearly, and achieve results that align closely with organizational objectives.
While this approach might seem rigid, it offers the best path to elevating these employees’ performance levels. A structured environment helps lower performers build confidence through incremental achievements, fostering gradual improvement and skill development. Over time, this structure can even transform lower performers into competent, dependable employees who consistently meet expectations. For example, a junior technician or new employee might initially struggle to grasp the complex dynamics of their role without clear guidance. If given too much autonomy too quickly, they’re likely to feel overwhelmed or make mistakes that hinder their confidence and progress. Instead, offering them structured training programs, regular check-ins, clearly outlined performance metrics, and ongoing feedback sets them on a path toward steady improvement.
Effective managers understand how to balance these two distinct approaches within a single team or department. It’s not about favoritism; it’s about recognizing the individual needs, capabilities, and motivators of each employee. Likewise, managers must remain adaptable. Performance levels are not static—employees grow, improve, and sometimes regress. Regular performance assessments, open dialogue, and a flexible approach to adjusting autonomy and structure can accommodate evolving employee needs.
Tailloring your management approach is no doubt challenging. It requires continual assessment, with an understanding of individual strengths and weaknesses, and the ability to clearly communicate different expectations within the same team. However, the effort is profoundly worth it. The reward is a dynamic, motivated team that consistently performs at a high level and fosters an organizational culture built on trust, growth, and continuous improvement.
Another advantage of giving high performers significant autonomy is the organic development of leadership skills. When empowered with freedom, these employees naturally take on greater responsibility, improving their strategic thinking, decision-making, and problem-solving skills. This not only benefits immediate productivity but also serves long-term succession planning and leadership development within the organization.
For lower-performing employees, the clarity and structure provided early on lay the groundwork for eventual growth into higher performance tiers. Structured environments often act as incubators, developing disciplined, reliable, and competent employees who can gradually handle greater autonomy. Ultimately, management success comes from understanding employee strengths and tailoring your approach accordingly. I’d always prefer the innovation, drive, and superior results a high performer delivers, even at partial capacity, over the predictable but limited contributions of lower performers at their maximum. By embracing this philosophy and clearly delineating where freedom ends and structure begins, managers create teams that not only achieve consistently high performance but also foster continual professional growth, job satisfaction, and a vibrant organizational culture.
Connect with Joe Way:
LinkedIn: https://linkedin.com/in/josiahway
X (Formerly Twitter): https://www.x.com/josiahway
