The Harsh Realities of the Workplace for High Performers, According to Ankur Warikoo

In a recent LinkedIn post, Ankur Warikoo discusses five difficult truths about the corporate environment that often penalize hardworking individuals. Warikoo frames these observations as essential insights for those striving for excellence in their careers, suggesting that many organizational structures inadvertently favor mediocrity over genuine high performance.

The Disconnect Between Hard Work and Reward

One of the primary points Warikoo highlights is the common workplace phenomenon where diligence can lead to an increased workload rather than recognition or advancement. He recounts an early career observation where diligent employees were consistently assigned more tasks, a situation his manager explained as a consequence of being perceived as capable. Warikoo presents this dilemma starkly:

“If you are good, more work will continue to be assigned to you because you are good. So you have two options – continue to pay the price, or stop being as good.”

According to Warikoo, this dynamic forces high performers into a difficult choice: either continue bearing the burden of extra work without commensurate reward, or consciously reduce their output to avoid being overloaded. This, he implies, is a systemic issue rather than an individual failing.

The Paradox of ‘Good Enough’ Feedback

Warikoo also delves into the inadequacy of feedback for high achievers. He shares an experience where a superior’s response to a request for feedback was simply, “You’re doing fine.” While seemingly positive, this feedback lacked actionable insights for improvement. As Warikoo points out:

“Good people rarely get coached to become great. So you have two options – demand feedback, or stay good forever.”

In Warikoo’s view, this indicates a broader organizational tendency to address only what is broken, neglecting the development of those who are already performing well. He argues that without targeted coaching and constructive criticism, even excellent employees can stagnate.

Navigating Organizational Resistance to Change

The post further addresses the challenge of introducing innovative or unconventional ideas within established corporate structures. Warikoo observes that bold, risky proposals are frequently dismissed because they deviate from the norm. He explains the underlying psychology:

“Organizations love the familiar. Change is uncomfortable. So you have two options – find a place that embraces risk, or blend in over time.”

This, Warikoo suggests, creates an environment where conformity is often rewarded over creativity, pushing individuals to either seek out more risk-tolerant cultures or suppress their innovative impulses.

The Influence of Politics Over Meritocracy

Warikoo tackles the uncomfortable reality that in many workplaces, political maneuvering can be more beneficial for career progression than sheer effort or merit. He notes that dedicated employees often expect their hard work to be recognized, but this is not always the case.

“Good employees believe effort will be noticed. But in many places, those who play politics rise faster,” Warikoo states. This leads to another critical choice for employees: adapt to the political landscape or seek environments that genuinely value merit.

The Power of Advocacy: Speaking Up for Needs

Finally, Warikoo emphasizes the importance of vocalizing one’s needs. He contrasts the experiences of colleagues who actively requested and received improvements—like better equipment or flexible work arrangements—with those who remained silent. According to Ankur Warikoo:

“The quiet ones were ignored. Only open mouths are fed.”

He concludes that the corporate world is often designed around the average, making the path harder for exceptional individuals. Warikoo’s ultimate advice is for high performers to actively seek out cultures that appreciate their contributions and to remain true to their inherent qualities, rather than compromising their integrity or potential.