Low performers can have significantly negative effects on any business, from lower overall workplace morale, increased workload on others, and a lack of initiative and motivation, resulting in a work culture where mediocrity is accepted.
Low performers sabotage the concept of teamwork. So much work today is accomplished through a team which must have the desire and motivation to work for a common goal using creativity, critical thinking and smarter problem solving. Keeping low performers in a team slows down progress.
Some companies may tolerate low performers out of a sense of duty or obligation, but keeping a low performer around isn’t doing them any favours.
You can of course be supportive of people with temporary setbacks because of health or personal issues without disrupting the team’s high-performance culture. We all go through troubled times. But when workers take advantage of the manager’s kind nature to sham or disrupt operations, the entire business is threatened.
So how should we handle low performers? Should they stay or should they go?
First and foremost, every employee deserves a chance to succeed at their role. Firing as a first course of action is never the answer. In my experience, many employees lack clarity, direction, feedback, alignment or are simply reacting to the environment they find themselves in.
Whether an employee lacks skills, is the wrong person for the role or has a poor attitude, the key is to address the issue immediately. If the person lacks the necessary skills, then provide training. You may also need to consider whether the person is in the right role, or whether they’d be better suited in another position. If the issue is attitude, they’re going to have to agree to some demonstrable changes in behaviour.
The best approach to take with low performers is to help them understand their performance gaps from a perspective of care. Take the time to listen to them to really understand why this person is not performing up to standards. There’s no room for accusations or judgement in this conversation. The more open and neutral you are, the more open the employee will be with you.
Here’s an interesting fact: underperformers don’t actually know they are underperforming. This phenomenon, called the Dunning Kruger effect, argues that people are poor judges of their own competence. And so the worse a person’s performance, the higher they’ll score themselves when compared to their peers. So don’t just expect they’ll know they should be doing better. Give them feedback to help them become aware of their shortcomings.
However, if after several attempts there are still performance issues, then it may be time to allow them to move on with their dignity intact. You’ll be doing them a great favour by giving them the opportunity to take up other career opportunities elsewhere, where they can hopefully do better.
We all know that tolerating poor performance is bad practice, and using today’s tight labour market as an excuse won’t cut it. When team members are able to collect the same pay check for doing a poor job motivation leaves the room, especially when others need to pick up the slack from those who simply aren’t doing what they’re supposed to.
We may be in a tight labour market, but keeping employees who aren’t willing to learn, have the wrong attitude and don’t want to make the changes necessary to do a good job are only going to bring the rest of the team down, whilst keeping you as their manager busy micromanaging and taking up too much of your time. Instead of dedicating your time and energy on growth, you’ll be caught up on damage control. Nobody wins. So you may want to consider letting go of employees who don’t want to pull their weight before the talent who does beats them to it. You may have to get more work done with fewer employees for a while, but in the long run everybody wins.
Underperforming employees are a big deal. Tolerating them at work demoralizes the rest of the team, makes the organization less competitive and impacts your results too. So let me ask you, who would you rather keep, the low performer or those who are doing a good job but are unhappy with the person who is dragging everyone behind?
Don’t let low performers harm your company. Managing or letting go of a low performer is difficult and one of the most common tasks that most managers delay. Whether you like it or not, this is something that must be done, the sooner the better. A chain is only as strong as its weakest link, and a company is only as strong as its lowest-performing employees.
Over to you now. Have you attempted to manage a low performer without a successful outcome? Have you lost any good performers as a result of low performers in the team? Is there anyone in your team who you know is not performing as expected? Is there potential for growth or is it time to let them go?
To your success,
Isabel
Spanish 
English