Three tips to manage an underperforming employee

Young male character is sitting at a table with computer and struggles with learning problems.

How do you manage an employee who’s been delivering lacklustre results and offering only excuses? Getting angry isn’t the right solution – find out what is here

CREDIT: This is an edited version of an article that originally appeared on Harvard Business Review

Engaging in micromanagement not only increases your workload but also ingrains in your team that you’ll shoulder the responsibility, ultimately fostering their lack of accountability. So, what strategies can you employ when trust in someone’s ability to deliver is lacking?

An alternative approach involves shifting from solely relying on trusting the individual to trusting the process itself.

Let’s delve into why an employee might falter. This exploration unveils insights into where a more robust framework could eliminate excuses. Initially, they might be unsure of your expectations or the requisites for effective performance. This indicates an alignment issue.

Alternatively, they might lack the necessary skills or knowledge to complete the task – a competence shortfall. Lastly, their motivation to achieve the desired outcome might be lacking. In order to thrive, an employee must possess a clear understanding of what needs to be done, the proficiency to do it, and the drive to accomplish it.

When an employee repeatedly falls short, one or more of these foundational pillars are likely missing. Your responsibility is to create a process acting as a scaffold for performance, strengthening their alignment, capabilities, and motivation. This process should offer support from task assignment to completion, while nullifying common excuses. The specific components required in this scaffold vary based on the individual’s specific shortcomings.

Clarity on the Objective

One of the causes behind employee underperformance is often their uncertainty about the expectations. Managers may sometimes rush through alignment conversations in the name of efficiency, yet this haste can backfire, particularly with unreliable employees. Investing time upfront to establish alignment not only facilitates better performance but also provides a framework to address persistent underperformance.

Start by focusing on the purpose of the work. Defining objectives leaves minimal room for excuses stemming from differing perspectives, motivations, or end goals. This approach proves useful when dealing with employees who lack a strategic outlook or prioritise personal success over team goals.

Clearly articulate the desired outcome. Who is the intended beneficiary? How would success be defined from their perspective? Where does this work fit into the larger scheme of initiatives or commitments? Answering these questions curtails the possibility of the person claiming ignorance about your expectations.

Once alignment on the purpose is achieved, outline the various possible outcomes – good, bad, and unacceptable. This is another step often bypassed by managers, which can lead to disappointment due to vague expectations. When dealing with an already mistrusted employee, not defining expectations is almost a surefire path to disappointment. To establish a rubric for their work, describe the minimum acceptable standard. What constitutes an exceptional outcome? What would be concerning or deemed a failure? Answering these questions removes the opportunity for subpar work to be dismissed as “good enough.” When objectives are crystal clear, alignment-based excuses are nullified.

Alignment on the Best Approach

Another key reason employees may struggle and make excuses for subpar performance is their lack of the necessary skills or knowledge. If your unease arises from competency gaps, your process should encompass more than just outlining the task; it should delve into how the task will be executed. Depending on your concerns, various strategies can be employed.

When you suspect the person might cut corners or omit essential steps, delve into the specifics of the required actions. Share effective methods and cite examples from prior projects. However, beware of simply talking at them; their nodding may not indicate comprehension.

Instead, inquire about their planned approach to the task. This will prompt them to elucidate their understanding. You can then offer necessary adjustments through targeted questions, such as, “How will you ensure finance’s alignment?” Providing these answers eliminates the excuse of not knowing how to proceed.

In some instances, your worry might pertain to their interpersonal rather than technical skills. If their ability to handle stakeholder relationships is a concern, emphasise the importance of interpersonal dynamics alongside the technical aspects. Collaborate to identify key stakeholders, their stakes in the project, and any relevant quirks. Who holds sway over decisions? What influences them? Beyond decision-makers and influencers, encourage them to consider other perspectives that should be included. Addressing these concerns precludes excuses based on inadequate support or difficult collaborators.

Capability gaps can also be mitigated by considering the decisions they might have to make and establishing pre-qualified decision criteria. This builds confidence that their decisions will align with your expectations. This can be initiated by discussing the criteria they will use for evaluation. How will they prioritise criteria when no perfect solution exists? Clarity on these criteria guides implementation while leaving room for autonomous decisions.

By reaching an agreement on the process, you eliminate many competency-related excuses.

Elevate the Stakes

The third possibility for underperformance lies in a lack of motivation. If mistrust stems from their lack of enthusiasm, emphasise their responsibility and the potential consequences of failure.

When seeking incentives, you have both positive and negative avenues. Linking successful task completion to favourable outcomes, like enhancing their reputation or future opportunities, serves as a positive reinforcement. Conversely, highlighting the negative consequences of failure serves as a deterrent. Whenever possible, integrate intrinsic rewards with these external consequences. Discuss what they enjoy about this work and the personal satisfaction derived from successful completion.

Additionally, anticipate instances where initial enthusiasm might wane at the first hurdle. In such cases, your process should include a plan B. Prepare for potential issues and create a contingency plan. What obstacles are likely to arise? How should they tackle these problems? Clarify the circumstances under which they should escalate the issue to you and when they should resolve it independently. Addressing these potential setbacks establishes the expectation of perseverance.

When consequences are articulated, motivation is reinforced.



Don’t forget to follow us on Twitter like us on Facebook or connect with us on LinkedIn!

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply