Managing Low Performers

Managing low performing employees is a topic that vexes leaders at all levels. How much time and effort should we invest to help them improve? How do you know when further efforts are pointless? When do you switch from “managing them up“ to ”managing them out“? Inevitably working with low performers will be stressful and likely create anger, anxiety, and sadness for the manager. How do we manage our own emotions throughout the process? What is the impact on the team of the manager spending so much time with the low performer (and perhaps neglecting the team)? What is the impact of firing them on the moral of the remaining team members?

Without exception, all of the leaders I want to work with struggle with this and they all would rather never fire anyone. Basically, I prefer not to work with psychopaths! And yet, never firing anyone is a bad idea.

Problems with setting the firing bar too low:

• Reduces team productivity
• Reduces team potential
• Reduces team moral
• Is career limiting
• In most cases, isn’t even the best thing for the employee in question

So how do we decide when to let someone go? One of my favorite leadership interview questions is: “When you are working with a low performer, what is your framework for deciding when to move past managing them up and instead manage them out?”

In most cases, candidates have not thought deeply on this subject and give an improvised answer. I think it is important to spend time thinking about this and then work with our peers and boss to have a consistent approach.

Of course, there is dimensionality to this decision. I find it helpful to think through the boundary conditions. What is the absolute lowest practical bar for when to fire somebody and what is the highest?

I’ve worked in cultures where the bar is very low: you’d have to verbally abuse someone, physically assault someone, or be completely derelict in performing your job functions before we’d let you go. At the other end of the spectrum is the famous Netflix “good enough, is goodbye”.

I’m not comfortable with either of those approaches, but where is the middle path? How can we create a defensible mental framework for where to set the bar between them? I’m going to propose 3 additional models. My point isn’t that you should use one of them, rather, I think any experienced manager should have a model and be able to explain their reasoning. This is the actual dictionary definition of “accountability” and as leaders we are accountable for hiring and firing decisions. Hopefully these models will inspire your own thinking on this subject and prep you for my interview question if nothing else!

1: Good money after bad

You have been working to improve the performance of the employee well before considering dismissal. As part of that work, you should have set clear expectations for their job performance based on the role and their seniority. A simple model is to track progress towards meeting those expectations, ideally quantitatively, and if their progress stalls below expectations for some length of time you give up. Likely then you start whatever version of a Performance Improvement Plan your HR team proscribes before you can let someone go (PIP). This is much easier with a clear set up expectations for each role and level — see below for help setting that up.

2: The classic performance and potential 2x2

Salesforce uses a much more elaborate version of this called the 9box, but either can be used as a framework for making the ‘manage out’ decision. Obviously, and again relative to role and level, if the employee is in the lower left box, it is probably time to cut bait. Essentially this is a more elaborate version of the first model: by tracking their progress against expectations you can determine which box they fit in. Most experienced managers develop an intuitive sense of their direct’s potential so you may not need to be quantitative till you’ve already given up and start the PIP.

3: Coach not parent

If we think of our employees as family, then we’d never give up on them. At most, we might encourage them to find a role more suited to their strengths and interests but we would never throw them out on the street. If instead we see ourselves as coaching a professional sports team, we have a mental model for balancing the needs of the employee, the team, and the company. We can ask: what is the impact this employee is having on their team and on the company? This model is nicely tunable both to your own preferences and to the level of seniority they have attained. A lower bar might be: “their performance is adequate and they rarely have a negative impact on their peers”. A higher bar might be: “they consistently raise the level of the team and deliver outcomes in the face of adversity”. Another way to frame this comes from professional baseball: how does this employee perform relative replacement value? If you went out and hired a replacement? (perhaps you have some new hires to compare them too?). Would replacing them likely be an upgrade for the team? Even if that is the case, your next question is, can you help them raise their game to match their estimated replacement value?

Leveling Guides or a “Rubric”

You’ll notice how often I say “performance relative to level”. It is important to set clear expectations and, as much as possible, have some objective standards. To do this, create a document that outlines your expectations for your team at each level of skill. You can use this to help low performers improve. Having it already documented is important in the legal aspects of a PIP. It also helps your high performers figure out how to demonstrate that they are performing at the next level. Lastly, just the exercise of creating these expectations can clarify what sort of team you are, what you value, who you want to hire, and who you want to promote. A great example comes from the former VP of Engineering at Box.com.

You will try to talk yourself out of doing this

Again, since you aren’t emotionally damaged, there will very likely be a part of your subconscious scheming to talk you out of this decision. In part, because like all creatures we try to move away from pain not towards it! The wonderful book “Radical Candor” suggests some of the ways we do this:

It will get better
“They made a little progress recently.” “There was that one stakeholder who had nice things to say about them.” This is where your leveling guide becomes key. Set a clear expectation for how long the improvement process should take and then stick to your guns. This is a great time to get a peer’s point of view.

Somebody is better than nobody
“At least they get some work done.” “If I have to go hire a replacement I’ll be short handed and need to spend all this time recruiting and interviewing!” This is the excuse I’ve seen most often and it has several fallacies. First, poor performance is often toxic in insidious and difficult to determine ways, especially in a shared code base or large, complex engineered system. Even “adequate” performance, in certain key roles, can be harmful in this regard. Secondly, yes, hiring is a lot of work but, that is the role of a leader. Don’t make excuses, go get it done. Lastly, in many cases a hole on your team is actually clarifying. Especially relative to having a low performer. You’ll get a better idea of what skill sets and personality types might enhance your team than you did previously.

Transferring them out is better
Sometimes, this is the right thing. But look carefully at candidates who move often, this can be a red flag. If they do move on, make sure it is to a genuinely new role. Don’t perpetuate the problem.

Bad for team moral
This one has surprised me time and again. I worry about the impact on the team of letting someone go and in every case, the feedback I get is the opposite of what I fear. What I hear is “thanks, we’re so glad to have a leader that can set a clear standard and stick to it. It is more fun to work with a strong team than to carry a low performer along with us.”

The one caveat here is changing the bar. If you came into a culture where only really horrible humans ever got fired and you are raising the bar, the first time you let someone go will be unsettling to the team. It is well worth it to do the rubric exercise and create a leveling guide. Be clear that you’ll be using those role descriptions for promotions and performance conversations. And be honest, that the bar has changed. Discuss this in your one on ones and listen carefully to the reactions you’ll get.

Managing your own emotions

It is important to attend to your own needs too. Staying emotionally regulated during this process can be challenging, especially if you flip to managing out. It is important to find compassion and empathy for employees you intend to fire and that starts with having compassion for yourself. Dealing with low performers can be extremely frustrating, you will need to process those emotions intentionally. They may be terrible at their job and dragging the moral of the entire team down and they are a valuable human in their own right. Can you work through a PIP effectively and with compassion? Hopefully you already have practices to help you stay regulated like meditation, exercise, and regularly venting with friends.

In the end, having a consistent and defensible approach and being clear with your low performers will serve you well throughout your career.