Performance management is key to sustaining a high-performing team where staff feel a sense of purpose and connection and take ownership over reaching their goals. But what do you do when someone isn\u2019t performing well\u2014they\u2019re not meeting expectations, hitting goals, or demonstrating the must-haves of their role? How much should you invest in performance improvement? When is it time to let someone go? And, how the #@$% do you decide?<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Whatever the origin of the problem, you need to own the solution.<\/strong> When you notice a performance issue, you have a number of options\u2014avoidance isn\u2019t one of them. Your job is to own staff development and performance management, which includes spotting and addressing problems when they arise, and doing so in a way that advances racial equity and inclusion, promotes personal and organizational sustainability, and gets lasting results.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Whatever your context (whether you\u2019re in a school or a nonprofit, unionized or not), the following guidance will help you navigate the tricky processes of addressing performance problems. Tailor your approach with your organization\u2019s policies and employee agreements in mind, and consult your lawyer as necessary. (Find tips for tricky situations<\/a>, too).<\/p>\n\n\n\n Wish someone had taught you this when you first started managing?<\/strong> It\u2019s not too late! Enroll in our<\/em> Ace Performance Management<\/a> training package. Gain the confidence and strategies you need to distinguish performance problems from growth areas, develop your team’s skills, and give better feedback. Grab your spot today!<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n Start by reflecting on two questions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n The first question is a check to make sure that the problem is really a performance problem (the person isn\u2019t meeting expectations around must-have skills or approaches) and not a conflict of preference or tradition. It also helps you see what\u2019s at stake if the problem remains unaddressed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The second question helps you identify what\u2019s in your respective spheres of control. The purpose of this exercise isn\u2019t to assign blame\u2014it\u2019s to name and identify the scope of the problem so that you can each own your impact and your piece of the solution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Next, reflect on your management practices. Have you provided clarity about expectations, roles, and goals? Built a strong and supportive relationship with the staff person? Checked your bias? Held regular check-ins where you provided support and coaching? See below for some additional choice points<\/a> in the manager\u2019s lane:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Performance management choice points:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n Important Note!<\/strong> It bears repeating that regardless of the origin, you<\/em> are responsible for dealing with performance problems even (sometimes especially!) when:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Owning your lane doesn\u2019t necessarily mean owning the problem. In most cases, when there\u2019s a performance problem, the responsibility is shared\u2014your job is to figure out what you can do better as a manager and to be specific and direct about what they\u2019re responsible for.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Take a look at their role and goals. What are the expectations about must-have skills or approach that you\u2019ve already communicated and aligned on? What are expectations beyond what\u2019s codified in their role and goals that is captured in your team culture, values, and norms?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Context is the backdrop of your work together, the stuff that\u2019s largely out of both of your control\u2014it\u2019s never the sole reason behind a performance problem, but it could significantly impact their performance (or your perception of it). Consider what else might be going on. Are there extenuating circumstances that could be negatively affecting their mental and emotional well-being (see: the events of 2020)? Are there organizational shifts or transitions that are creating bottlenecks, communication challenges, or stretching people thin?<\/p>\n\n\n\n After reflecting, check in with your staff person to share your feedback and seek their perspective. (If this is an issue you\u2019ve already discussed multiple times, skip ahead to the next step.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n Use CSAW<\/a> to prepare for the conversation. If it\u2019s a problem that you believe could escalate or can\u2019t be resolved with some feedback\u2014or even if you\u2019re simply not sure\u2014use the manager reflection worksheet in our Performance Improvement Plan Toolkit<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Keep in mind:<\/p>\n\n\n\n In your feedback, be explicit about what you think is in your respective spheres of control. Own your part(s) and be firm that they are responsible for how they show up and what they accomplish.<\/p>\n\n\n\n If you\u2019re checking in about the issue for the first time, your goal is to sound an alarm, not (necessarily) to resolve the situation in one conversation. The purpose is to avoid surprises down the line, whatever you choose to do. It\u2019s good to identify next steps for moving forward (the \u201cW\u201d in CSAW is for \u201cWrap up\u201d), but we don\u2019t recommend making any on-the-spot decisions about performance improvement plans.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Both types of feedback are intended to help someone grow. The difference is about consequences. Corrective feedback helps someone get from off track to on track. If nothing changes (or changes enough), there will be more steps taken to resolve the issue, with letting go as a possible option. Developmental feedback helps people take their skills from good to great, or from meeting to exceeding expectations. If nothing changes as a result, the person likely won\u2019t suffer negative consequences. A common manager error is not being explicit about the type of feedback they are offering. This can lead to a staff person interpreting corrective feedback as developmental feedback, misunderstanding the stakes, and then being surprised by a formal warning further down the line.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Step back and assess the problem, check your biases<\/a>, and weigh your options. You may also want to seek perspective from others (such as your manager or peers\u2014discreetly) to gain more insight.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ultimately, this step is about answering these questions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Consider:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Consider:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Here, you might consider their overall track record of success in their role, including course corrections and development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Note:<\/em> Before deciding on next steps, always check your existing policies and consult your HR or legal advisors. Some organizations have employee manuals or collective bargaining agreements that commit the organization to following specific progressive discipline steps. As with any employment issue where legal issues may come into play, consider speaking with a lawyer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n As a manager, you typically have three options for moving forward:<\/p>\n\n\n\n This option involves applying more resources to support the person to meet performance expectations. It could include offering ongoing, specific feedback, providing coaching and training opportunities, and side-by-side work. It can also include putting someone on a performance improvement plan<\/a> (formally or informally). Below are a few common reasons for choosing this route:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Note:<\/em> In an ideal world, you\u2019d always be in some variation of \u201cinvest\u201d mode, even if there aren\u2019t any detectable performance problems. If you\u2019re only investing in your staff at the point when there is a performance problem, you\u2019re setting yourself up for trouble.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When done well, coaching out is a win-win solution for the organization and the staff member. In a coaching out conversation, the manager is honest about their assessment of the situation and offers possible paths forward, one of which includes the staff person leaving their role. The outcome is that the staff member decides to leave their role (and in most cases, the organization). It\u2019s a useful approach when performance is not meeting expectations but there\u2019s still hope for improvement. It can also be appropriate when the work is generally meeting expectations but the role still isn\u2019t a great fit. The key to coaching out is offering real options so that the staff person can exercise their agency. (When the options aren\u2019t real, coaching out conversations are just letting go conversations in disguise.)<\/p>\n\n\n\n You might be on your way to coaching out if any of the following are true:<\/p>\n\n\n\n Here, we\u2019re using \u201clet go\u201d to mean \u201cfire\u201d\u2014terminating someone\u2019s employment at your organization due to performance problems. For many of our clients, letting go is a last resort. And for good reasons, too\u2014it\u2019s uncomfortable, irreversible, and life-altering. For those of us committed to social justice, it can feel counter to our values\u2014we want people to feel respected and valued, we worry about impacts on their livelihood (which is one reason to offer severance packages), and we want our movements to bring people in, not let them go. It\u2019s hard to tell someone that they\u2019re not doing a good enough job. However, when people are struggling to meet expectations and it\u2019s having an impact on your people and your results, letting go is sometimes the best option. Here are some indicators that it might be time to let go:<\/p>\n\n\n\n The above options are not mutually exclusive\u2014they are steps on a path. Depending on the problem, the circumstances, and your organizational norms and policies, you may choose to invest first and progress to coaching out or letting go if the problem persists. For others, you might go directly to coaching out or letting go.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Did you notice that none of the options we laid out include \u201cdo nothing,\u201d \u201cget your boss to deal with it,\u201d or \u201cwait for the person to quit?\u201d That\u2019s because whatever you do, you<\/em> need to decide<\/strong>. The longer you delay, the more the problem will grow\u2014impacting others and your results. Test your thinking with your manager or a trusted colleague to check for biases. Then, communicate promptly with your staff person. Schedule a time to talk to them, prepare a script, and even practice with someone if necessary.<\/p>\n\n\n\n To see these four steps in action,<\/strong> check out our addressing performance problems case study<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n1) Reflect<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
\n
Own the management lane.<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
Identify their sphere of control.<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Consider your context.<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
2) Check in<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Spheres of control.<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Don\u2019t jump to decisions.<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Corrective vs. developmental feedback.<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
3) Assess<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
What is really<\/em> the problem?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
What parts of it can be reasonably addressed with the resources and time available?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
If the problem is addressed, how likely is the staff person to achieve and sustain the level of performance that you need?<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
4) Consider your options and decide<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Invest.<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Coach out.<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n
Let go.<\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n