People performance management

Objective

A leader must create the context in which performance is assessed and measured. This is perhaps not as obvious as it sounds – it is about much more than generalised assessments of effectiveness. It demands a clear vision for an organisation, translated first into a strategy and business plan and subsequently into objectives per business unit or department. These should then be deployed as objectives for individuals.

This cascade is important not simply to align activity, but to set individual accountability within an overall framework of corporate accountability. The benefit of this is clear – individuals will always be more motivated when they can relate their activities and objectives to their business.

To this extent, you really are the conductor of the corporate orchestra, directing a score and parts, and balancing overall cohesion with individual flair.

Context

Some key factors which can affect individuals’ performance include:

• personal circumstances – it is simply unrealistic to believe that these can be excluded from the work environment, indeed their suppression may well contribute to stress;
• previously poor relationships with other leaders, managers and peers which may have contaminated not only the individual but their ability to communicate and demonstrate competence;
• pigeonholing – historical, learned assumptions about individuals’ strengths and weaknesses which, for whatever reason, may be unrepresentative of their real abilities;
• cynicism on the part of individuals who may have been disaffected or discouraged by previous leadership strategies and styles, or by the perceived relentlessness of change;
• lack of previous feedback, training and development so that individuals’ strengths and weaknesses have never been effectively monitored and developed;
• poor personal organisation skills masking relevant competencies;
• poor interpersonal skills – this may affect individuals’ effectiveness while masking the real contribution they can make;
• a perceived lack of respect shown by peers and colleagues contributing to a resentment that can distort performance;
• stress arising from any of the above factors – or none of them!

This is not intended to be a definitive list, but sets out to demonstrate how any evaluation of performance requires a sophisticated appreciation of all factors. This does not mean that such factors are inevitably regarded as extenuating, only that a clear assessment of action – required next steps – can be more measured and appropriate.

You will also develop antennae to detect poor performance issues – not just by direct observation, but also through explicit and implicit feedback via corporate ‘chatter’.

Challenge

You must also consider the appropriateness of your business organisational structure for the demands of its chosen marketplace. There are many approaches here, but in essence you will attempt to align internal competence with customer demands. This is a major pillar in dealing with performance – an organisation’s ability to deliver objectives depends on a clear assessment of the competencies required, and thus the capabilities of staff against those competencies.

So unless you are clear about strategy and objectives, and what competencies are required to deliver them, it is hard to assess performance truly, and impossible to define or evaluate individuals’ contributions.

Success

In this regard, I have always found the involvement of HR to be invaluable. HR can have a bad reputation, but that only happens when HR professionals focus on what used to be called ‘personnel’, i.e. hiring and firing and record-keeping. When HR takes a broad view, measures the business environmental climate and sees individuals as individuals within a complete context, then it has a major role to play. Indeed, you should actively cultivate a close relationship with your HR professionals because they can provide a ‘people prism’ through which strategies and decisions can be viewed.

Confronting poor performers with the reality of their under-achievement is tough, not least because many individuals in this position are unaware of their performance issues. And if they are aware then they may create significant defensive barriers to avoid confrontation. You have the primary responsibility as leader of your direct reports to address their performance issues, and this can only be done one-to-one.

If you have decided on an exit strategy for a colleague, this should never be implemented without the counsel of HR, first and foremost because any decision to terminate a colleague’s employment is, for them, a life-changing event. So you must expect a professional HR representative to challenge the justification of your approach. You must expect that HR will want to ensure that any such decision is taken for defendable reasons. So in the act of dealing with performance, you will be under scrutiny, too.

If endorsed, your exit decision will need to be managed within the prevailing legal framework, which may include guidance on how to run the termination meeting, what can be said, and even the location and timing of such a discussion.

The discussion itself is in one sense the ultimate corporate failure – the admission that recruitment has failed. You should:

• be direct, to the point, sensitive and remain aware that in such circumstances reactions are impossible to predict;
• present a clear follow-up process (depending on whether the exit is planned to be immediate or deferred) with key opportunities set out for the affected individual to respond, challenge and enter further conversations, notably about financial implications;
• be aware that no one will ever thank you for such a decision, but at least they should leave feeling they have been treated fairly, within the law and with dignity.

Alternatively, if you are adopting an improvement approach with a specific individual, you must:

• indicate from the outset, in a discussion, that you want to have a performance meeting with an improvement agenda;
• be prepared to provide evidence of a number of instances of underachievement;
• ask the individual concerned if they have any questions or want to respond immediately;
• set a time for a further discussion.

This should be followed by a separate meeting with relevant staff from HR to enable not only an additional perspective but also to facilitate (if needed) a broader or more reflective conversation. The key output is a mutual agreement about required improvements, and a timetabled agenda for action with agreed and measurable objectives. This should be supported by ongoing feedback about progress, with feedback not restricted solely to formal review points.

To be able to confront identified poor performance demands, as noted above, you need a clear understanding of what is required from a role. Attempting to develop a poorly performing individual against such a standard has no guarantee of success, but the attempt will garner for you what you may come to realise is gold dust – respect for the integrity and courage you display in honesty and good faith.

Pitfalls

Some people like to rely on instinct and will develop black-or-white views about colleague ‘fit’. But in the complex dynamic which I am describing in this book, personal performance can be distorted by an array of factors, and I believe that it is your role to understand such nuances. Not least because a leader who is seen to be sensitive to the individual as an individual, and who does not accept received opinions and labels, is more likely to command respect and, in fact, increase performance.

This is as thorny an issue to deal with as you will face. It is too easy to assume – even with the power that leadership conveys – that the answer to underperformance is the exit strategy, i.e. the poor performer is summoned to receive the bad news that ‘things are not working out’ and dispatched under the ambit of the ‘compromise agreement’ which employment legislation may require. This can be a solution, but this approach can be ultimately self-defeating if it is seen to be typical. To the employee it will give the impression of a ‘you are in or you are out’ culture, where personal development is sacrificed for short-term expediency. For you, it can represent a get-out which can be used to avoid confronting true leadership challenges.

Leaders’ checklist

• Be as clear as you can about the outputs and competencies required for each of your organisational areas to establish standards.
• Engage your HR team in a full analysis of ‘fit’ against standards, and an identification of weak areas.
• Be absolutely prepared to confront individuals with weak performance, on an evidence basis.
• Regard the process of improvement as an opportunity, not a threat or chore – individuals very rarely don’t want to do a good job, or want to face the humiliation of departure, so you have basic motivational drivers on your side.
• Remember that process is an important part of performance improvement, with potential legal pitfalls.
• Recognise that improvement processes of this kind may not come naturally, and that you yourself may require development and support in handling them.