The Impact of Allowing Poor Performers to Stay

​Most of us can probably think of at least one person in our current workplace, who is a bad fit.

✅ Sometimes they’re a nice person, very much liked by all, but bad at their job.

✅ Other times, the employee is technically excellent, but is thoroughly unpleasant and unapproachable, almost impossible to work with.

Neither of these employees is a good fit, and both are poor performers.

Why, then, do managers allow them to stay?

💠 The employer loses-out by not having the right person in the role.

💠 The pleasant employee deserves to be in a job where they can shine, even in a different position at your organization.

💠 The difficult employee will probably stay, causing untold damage to morale and playing a part in others deciding to leave.

Because, no matter how much you feel you can’t do without them, since they're so technically good, remember that lost productivity, absenteeism and turnover are a costly business.

And they're costs that are not being off-set by any value you think they're bringing.

It’s therefore critical to have honest, clear discussions about what’s happening, and give them a chance to improve.

Then, if things don’t turn around, it’s time to move them on.

𝘽𝙚𝙘𝙖𝙪𝙨𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙞𝙨 𝙣𝙤𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙢𝙤𝙧𝙚 𝙙𝙚𝙢𝙤𝙧𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙯𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙮𝙤𝙪𝙧 𝙝𝙞𝙜𝙝 𝙥𝙚𝙧𝙛𝙤𝙧𝙢𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙣 𝙩𝙤 𝙨𝙚𝙚 𝙤𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙗𝙚𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙝𝙚𝙡𝙙 𝙖𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙡𝙚.

They will quickly become disengaged and eventually leave.

So, train your managers to have difficult conversations with employees.

And ensure your company has the right person in every seat. 

Including your managers themselves, a role that is critical to get right.

✅  Also, keep in mind that it's easier to hire right than to deal with a bad hire later on.
​
In the meantime, by allowing poor performers to stay, you are disengaging your employees and undermining your culture.