About Your Poor Performance...

[Cartoon courtesy of Grantland Cartoons]

Since workforce management experts seem to agree that even a few shoddy employees out of hundreds or thousands can diminish profits, it would be good if you could create additional programming for managers on handling poor performers.

It's hard to imagine, but it turns out many managers are nicer than their subordinates think. Or maybe it's timidity that keeps them from confronting the one (two or three) on their staff who isn't pulling his/her/their weight. It's funny, but I think most of us know the archetype of the employee whose main work project for the day consists of traveling from his desk to the refrigerator or from his desk to the vending machine or from his desk to the delicatessen down the street. He is so consumed with his eating regimen (the health gurus he follows warn of the pernicious effects of not immediately gratifying hunger) that little else gets accomplished.

Or perhaps the work is being accomplished but not within the time frame his manager and co-workers had in mind. Even in the era of the skeleton staff, beware of the employee who always has a pile of work he can never get to the bottom of, while refusing additional support. It's counter-intuitive, but sometimes these disengaged under-achievers hoard the work they say they can't get to the bottom of. Why this is so remains a mystery, but I have some thoughts about it. Well, what if he's so inefficient that he doesn't know where on his computer or offline filing system the incomplete work resides?  Maybe he accidentally deleted it months ago—the level of work he has is so "overwhelming," after all, how could he possibly be expected to remember where it's all located?  Or what if he doesn't want to give any of it away  to, say, a junior staffer or intern, because said person would complete the tasks within a few weeks, embarrassing the under-achiever, aka "poor performer" or "PP" for short.

One of the worst things about PPs is they're usually not bad people. I long to work with an individual who is both incompetent and obviously unkind (have already worked with a person who was incompetent and slyly unkind). It's not that I'm a glutton for punishment. Rather, I know it's inevitable that, sooner or later, at nearly any job, you'll work with a less-than-stellar colleague. It's great if you can point out their lackluster performance to the manager, and have the manager say, "Oh, yeah, that guy is a real creep and a pain in the you-know-what. I don't much like him either, so if you (our high-performer) don't like him, and his presence is causing you grief, I'd just as soon get rid of him."  Let me tell you, that exchange between high-performing worker bee and worker bee manager about nincompoop PP doesn't happen often. Managers have a hard time dispensing with PPs because doing so makes them feel guilty. Who wants to lay-off a nice guy with a family to feed?  "He's not the world's best whatever-it-is-he's-supposed-to-be-doing, but I don't want his children to starve, or for him not to be able to go to his lake house as often this year," the well-intentioned manager will say to him or herself.

Whatever the cause of the guilt (children or limiting lake house access), new manager seminars need to show managers how to ignore it. It's hard to tell a poor performer to "shape up or ship out" (a favorite expression of my first manager, my mother). But it's harder for the diligent employee(s) to work side-by-side with a disengaged human slow engine. If you're revved up to start your day, and complete and exceed your assigned tasks, ask your guilt-ridden managers to imagine how it would feel to watch and listen to a PP sputtering along while earning the same or an even higher pay and title. To add insult to injury, PPs often end up with higher pay and title than more diligent workers as a result of recessionary reorganization.  Sometimes a work group inherits a PP with a set title and salary. When managers in their new manager or updated manager training are asked to consider this scenario, they may find they've been feeling guilty about the wrong thing.

The kindest way to handle poor performance is to nicely, but nonetheless directly, confront the lowly performer. Teach managers not to be afraid to point out the difference between their level of productivity and quality of work with that of a colleague(s). Even if you don't have forced ranking at your organization, it's a good idea because the reality of the work world is employees in the same business division are pitted against each other for corporate resources. Managers who want to do the right thing have to ensure those resources are getting distributed as fairly as possible. Ignoring an unfair distribution of dollars, title, and corporate niceties is a justified cause of guilt. So, first off, to get back to our discussion with the PP, teach managers to make it direct and draw contrasts to the worker(s) who is their star. Then, just to be nice (to assuage your guilt), tell PP you want to give him a chance to show his stuff. But that this (unlike his never-ending pile of incomplete tasks) is limited. Allow managers to give PP a three-month probationary period to demonstrate he can bring his work level up to that of whichever colleagues are being paid the same or less and/or possess the same or a lesser title. If he doesn't meet this challenge, then off he goes.

If ultimatums don't suit all your managers (and in the event that they're just as frustrated as PP's other colleagues), teach them to tell PP his position is being eliminated. When/if he asks why (PPs don't always have the most inquisitive, lively minds), tell managers to tell him the truth: We only have a small amount of resources, and the manager would prefer those resources (money, title, corporate niceties) to be directed to the highest-performing worker(s). If he asks about how the high-performer(s) will handle the additional work (she/he's a high-performer, but not superwoman/man), tell him another truth: You're planning to promote her/him/them into PP's soon-to-be former title and salary, and then hire an entry-level junior employee to pick up the slack. To make the conversation and transaction guilt-free, give PP a piece of good news: To ensure a gradual, organized transition, PP has three months left on staff during which time he will transfer his tasks to the high-performer(s), and look for a new job.

Beyond a lack of productivity, PPs most often are disengaged from their work. They're unhappy, so time-tabling them out is the kindest, least-"guilty"/least-risky thing your managers can do. Remember, PP can just as easily travel to the refrigerator on another company's payroll.

How are your managers trained to handle poor performers?  What do you teach them, and are they good at applying those lessons?