Today, performance metrics of managers are touted as a fundamental cornerstone of employee performance management. But beware that, if improperly used, they degenerate into organisational curse and performance appraisal politics. As these metrics are being widely adopted in organisations, it is prudent that they are used judiciously by those in authority to assess managers, and consistently induce more commitment, motivation and employee development rather than entrench despondency. Using managers` reflectionon their own experience of being appraised, this study aims to understand how the use of balanced scorecard to assess individual managers influences their behaviour, thoughts and emotions within their organisation. A total of 10 out of 32 managers from an advisory division within a multinational professional services firm in South Africa were identified using stratified random sampling. Face-to-face, in-depth interviews with these managers were audio recorded, transcribed and analysed using open coding and constant comparison technique to induce emergent themes. Findings show consensus among managers that leadership bias, misuse and abuse of their individual balanced scorecards by directors has predominantly negative, manipulative and evaluative effects which induces low commitment and morale in a professional services firm. In particular, managers reveal that exclusive focus on the bottom line and individual success by all means necessary, nurtures counter productive perspectives which deride team philosophy. Inadvertently, these pronounce subordination of personal circumstances to organisational pressure while promoting competitive individualism to succeed. Implications of these findings for directors and development of managers are discussed to ensure that more satisfied and committed management constitute the durable hub of firm success.