There's actually some research, which I couldn't find that points out just the opposite. The best performers often like being the best performers, and actually take a slight pay hit for being considered the best.

But there's probably also a difference between working with someone who does no work, takes 3 hour lunches, and never gets anything done on time. Versus the person who works hard, but just takes 20% longer than you to get stuff done. The former really bug people, but the latter tends to just make you look good, while still helping the company.

I've left several companies because of the general attitude of letting lazy/bad/non-caring employees slide by.