
This is part 3 and the final part of an on-going series about managing ‘difficult’, but valuable staff (i.e. ‘mavericks’) in a technology-intensive businesses.
Mentoring mavericks by working to instill some modicum of patience for the firm’s rules entails time and is a distraction for the maverick’s manager. The organization minimally needs to acknowledge this challenge and preferably provide training to their managers about assessing a maverick’s real worth for the organization and determining how much effort should be expended to keep them productive. Some line managers will be more inclined and capable of working with mavericks, so the organization can consider appropriately pairing these managers with the nonconformists.
Mavericks are iconoclasts so their survival depends on how important their talents are perceived to be and how forbearing the business is about a maverick’s idiosyncrasies. Even if this eccentricity is tolerated thanks to their line manager’s good offices, the organization as a whole may still signal ambivalence by providing few opportunities for promotion and/or increased remuneration. The first-line manager has an important role in mitigating this organizational doubt by helping the maverick to stay visible and by publicly crediting their contributions. Nonetheless, despite the manager’s cleverness, the organization’s immune system may ultimately reject the nonconformist so the manager needs to be prepared for this eventuality.
At the strategic level, there is inherent friction between a business’s impulse to encourage staff innovation while also seeking to control its pace and character. Some organizations attempt to resolve this friction by channeling improvements through senior management blessed activities and initiatives, but mavericks may threaten this arrangement by initiating ad hoc, bottoms-up efforts to originate new products, services and processes. As management doesn’t have a monopoly on novel ideas potentially benefiting the organization, so openness toward nonconformist thinking may benefit the business.
Of course, being a maverick isn’t a binary quality and many employees occasionally demonstrate nonconformist tendencies. However, challenges to the organization are usually limited as most staff members don’t have the raw talent to really shake things up and, moreover, they value predictability and stability even if they sometimes find the organization’s rules constraining.
Beyond whatever benefits an individual maverick provides to a given business, they also offer a window into the tension between employees and businesses particularly in tech-intensive sectors that depend on staff creativity to drive corporate R&D success; mavericks are a more extreme example of what ‘regular’ employees are capable of. Mavericks challenge the organization to define when an individual’s worth outweighs their descriptiveness and, when that balance tilts towards keeping the individual, how to manage their talent without undue organizational distortion. The first-line manager plays a critical – and often unsung – role in this effort. And, for all the regular staff who may offer up innovative ideas that are outside of corporate norms, how mavericks are treated is a gauge for how nonstandard, but potentially worthy, ideas are received by management. All staff members may feel freer to volunteer potentially really useful innovation where senior management is at least somewhat open to novel thinking. Further, this openness may allow the company to have a better chance of surviving in dynamic tech sectors.

