A, B and C Players: How to Spot Them - and Who’s the Real Danger?
- Aaron Lim
- Nov 23, 2025
- 7 min read
Updated: Jan 6
(Plus: How the Will vs Skill Matrix Guides You in Leading Each Group)
In a previous article (https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-make-nine-9-box-four-4-work-you-aaron-lim/?trackingId=ToLlFinTSgOVUdCIFN%2FbRg%3D%3D), I shared how leaders can use the Will vs Skill Matrix to diagnose performance patterns and guide teams effectively. It remains one of the most practical tools for me to understand how someone works.
Talent performance is not just about capability - It’s about intention, mindset, and behaviour
This is why classifying employees as A, B, or C players is helpful, but not enough, unless you apply the right lenses - including the Will vs Skill and the Trust vs Performance model.
Hear me out.
In every organisation, we talk about A players (your accelerators) and C players (your misfits) - How about the group that quietly shapes your culture the most?
B players.
They are steady, dependable, and generally pleasant to work with. However, they also pose the greatest long term risk - not because of who they are, but because of the subtle drag they can create on performance, culture, and change.
Before we get into the whys, let’s set the foundation.
"A" Players: Your Accelerators
They are defined by how they show up, long before the results appear. They deliver high quality work with minimal supervision, spot solutions before problems arise, and learn fast by asking sharp questions and seeking feedback. Trusted by stakeholders, they influence even without titles and lift the performance of everyone around them. With low drama and high accountability, they are the people who accelerate your organisation forward. Trust is both their foundation and their currency.
These "A" players expand the organisation’s capacity.
"B" Players: The Steady Middle
Often reliable and well-liked, B players provide consistent, decent work without necessarily pushing boundaries. They follow instructions well, but rarely initiate fresh perspectives and prefer to stay within their comfort zones. While they show potential, it is often inconsistent, and their coachability depends on their own motivation. Stakeholders generally trust them to get the job done, but they rarely inspire confidence beyond their immediate tasks.
"B" players can maintain momentum… but can also quietly slow it down.
"C" Players: The Resource Drainers
C players usually reveal themselves quickly. Their work is inconsistent and often unreliable, requiring high levels of supervision. They may respond defensively, shift blame, and exhibit heightened or unpredictable emotional reactions. Stakeholders often avoid collaborating with them due to limited or absent trust. They show little awareness or willingness to improve and tend to drain both resources and focus, making it challenging to maintain momentum.
"C" players strain team capacity, diverting resources away from high-impact priorities.
Trust vs Performance
Speaking of trust - This reminds me of a powerful Simon Sinek clip I revisit often. He explains why high performance means nothing without trust - and why trustworthy, solid performers often contribute more to long term culture, than high-performing (but toxic) individuals:
Simon challenges (against) the finite mindset (a way of thinking where people see situations, goals, or life itself as having fixed rules and a clear endpoint - like a game with a defined finish line where the goal is simply to “win” and beat others).
This means focusing on continuous improvement and collaboration rather than just "winning". In this context, a leader with an infinite mindset would:
Prioritise trust over performance: Promote the trustworthy employee with solid performance over the high-performing employee who lacks (for example) integrity.
Coach, don't cut: Invest in coaching and developing employees who are struggling, but have the capacity and willingness to improve - rather than simply moving them out.
Encourage collaboration: Create an environment where employees feel safe to contribute and grow together. A high-performing employee with low trust is more dangerous than a moderate performer with high trust.
Identifying Your Player Types
Here’s a simple yet practical way to identify A, B, and C players:
A Players (Top Performers)
How to spot them:
Consistently deliver - High quality work with minimal supervision
Proactive problem solvers - They see issues early and take initiative
Growth mindset - They actively seek feedback, ask good questions, and learn fast
Influence without authority - Stakeholders naturally trust them
Raise the bar (and those around them) - Their presence improves team dynamics
Low drama, high accountability - They own results and behaviours
These are your high Will + high Skill quadrant. They also tend to rate high on trust, which Simon frames as more important than performance alone.
Useful signal: You feel safe handing them critical tasks because you know they will figure it out and get them done, resourcefully.
B Players (Steady, Solid, High Potential)
How to spot them:
Stay within their comfort zone, but usually reliable and consistent
Rarely challenge the status quo, but do decently good work
Seldom initiate difficult conversations or changes, but respond well to guidance
Situational performers, only shining in the right environment
Inconsistently showing parts of A-player behaviours
In Will vs Skill terms, B players oscillate between:
High Will + Low Skill (capable but coasting), or
Moderate Will + Moderate Skill (steady but not scaling)
And here is where Simon’s model becomes important: B players can either be trusted but not high-performing, or productive but not trustworthy - and the leadership approach (we will discuss this further down this article) is fundamentally different.
Useful signal: You will think: “If I coach them well, they can level up.”
C Players (Misaligned or Underperforming)
How to spot them:
Low reliability: Repeated misses on quality, deadlines, or follow-through
Need to be instructed constantly: Struggle with independence
Creates Friction: Always defensive and giving excuses, blame-shifting
Consistent negative signals from stakeholders
Low Emotional quotient (EQ): Lack self-awareness or willingness to improve
They often sit in the Low Skill + Low Will quadrant. Over time, the cost of keeping them becomes higher than the cost of replacing them.
Useful signal: You spend disproportionate time managing them compared to their impact.
Handy quick test
Ask yourself: “If the team doubled tomorrow, who would I clone? Who would I keep? Who would I replace?”
Your instinct is often accurate.
So Why Are B Players The Most dangerous?
This often surprises leaders. After all, B players are pleasant, dependable, and rarely cause trouble - that’s exactly why they’re dangerous. Their impact is slow, invisible, and cumulative.
Here’s how:
1. They create false stability
B players make everything look “fine.” No fires, but no momentum either. Nothing is broken, but nothing is accelerating either.
Leaders don’t feel urgency to intervene because things look… fine.
And “fine” gives leaders a false sense of progress.
2. They lower the performance bar silently
The organisation and teams calibrate to the median behaviour.
When the middle is B-level output:
"A" players feel like frustrated outliers
Standards slowly drift downward
Mediocrity becomes normalised
Excellence becomes optional
This is how high-performance cultures slowly soften - because Culture is not set by the best or worst performers, it is set by the majority.
3. They block opportunities for A players
Managers often lean on B players because they’re dependable, but this inadvertently sidelines A players (the ones with hunger, will, and trustworthiness).
Because B players are “safe”, they dilute A players’ growth, exposure, and recognition.
Over time, A players don’t burn out; they check out. They move to environments where excellence is rewarded, not diluted.
These A players leave for environments that stretch them.
4. They resist change quietly
Unlike C players who push back openly, B players resist through:
Delayed execution
Selective prioritisation
Minimal initiative
Compliance without conviction
Silent resistance is harder to detect, and unfortunately far more damaging.
5. They struggle under pressure
B players function well in stable environments. When the business hits turbulence, ambiguity, or transformation?
They hesitate.
And hesitation during transition (and sometimes even crisis) is costly.
6. Many choose comfort over growth
B players often plateau not because they lack skill - but because they lack will. Failing to diagnose this early turns “steady” into “stagnant”.
Many B players don’t lack skill - they lack hunger, risk appetite, or self belief. They stay in the same capacity for years while the organisation evolves past them.
By the time misalignment is obvious, the cost of inaction may be too high.
The Leadership Paradox
C players get removed.
A players get promoted.
B players stay.
And whatever stays… becomes culture.
That’s why these “steady but stagnant” performers pose the biggest hidden risk. Not because they’re disruptive, but because they’re comfortable.
Psychology layer (your sweet spot)
A Players: Strong self-regulation and rarely display toxic communication behaviours
B Players: May show defensiveness or occasional withdrawal under pressure, but remain receptive to coaching and growth
C Players: Frequently exhibit criticism, contempt, blame, or other corrosive behaviours that create repeated relational breakdowns
Leadership Takeaway: How the Will vs Skill Matrix Helps You
Beyond understanding will and skill, leaders also need to recognise who they are working with, especially when the team is made up of A, B, and C players. This distinction matters, because your team composition silently shapes your culture, your pace, and ultimately your results.
Understanding A, B and C players is only half the equation. Leading them well is the real test, and this is where the Will vs Skill matrix becomes powerful:
High Will, High Skill (A players) - Our job is to stretch them, protect them, and give them room to run.
High Will, Low Skill (Some B players) - Invest in coaching. They can become A players.
High Skill, Low Will (Other B players) - This group is dangerous. Their attitude, not ability, limits the team.
Low Will, Low Skill (C players) - Make fast decisions. Prolonging the fit hurts everyone.
This is where many leaders misclassify B players.
Some B players are high trust, low ambition (great long term teammates). Others are high performance, low trust (cultural poison).
The difference determines whether a B player is:
worth investing in, or
quietly eroding trust, team dynamics, and long term culture
This is exactly why B players require the most careful leadership approach.
What Great Leaders Do
The answer isn’t to eliminate B players. It is to be intentional about them.
Elevate the Bs with potential
Redirect those Bs who are mismatched
Decide early on those Bs who are stuck
Protect A players from being overshadowed by steady mediocrity
Use the Will vs Skill Matrix to coach with precision
Leaders can’t just celebrate the top or fix the bottom - they have to intentionally shape the middle. High performance is not an accident; it’s engineered.
And above all...
It all begins by cultivating trust and developing the middle.
Aaron Lim - People & Culture Leader | Exploring the intersection of Business, Behaviour and Resilience | Helping leaders build alliances that turn uncertainty into strength.
Comments