It is not as simple as that.

This is about perception (actually labeling). Is there a context in which a normal, high-performing and motivated individual would be labeled as an asshole? A team of slackers would do that for a gazillion reasons.

The HBR article can be summarized like this: tell the one who people complain about to become nicer and threat to fire him/her. It is a junior thinking because it doesn't advise a proper investigation and relies on trust to majority (least effort to manage the situation is to make the majority happy).

Of course, it can be (and it very likely is) that the person in question is really unable to function in a group and has low social skills.

It is also likely that the person in question holds keys of a critical piece of the system because the company didn't want to hire more people while there was a change to distribute it. The easiest way to manage a team is to have one or few high peroformers (who do all the complex work) and the rest of the people around them are "helpers". At the end, they have to tolerate the high performing assholes because it's risky if they leave.