In our experience, the performance management process is one of the most misunderstood concepts, and one of the most poorly used.
Performance management, unfortunately, is usually used as a blunt instrument to get rid of a long-standing low-performing staff member. People thrown into the formal performance management process are already written off – the entire aim of the process is for the person to be sacked or pushed out of the organisation.
Rarely at this stage of the game is there any real interest in the actual development of the person. And often the attitude is that there is no time for that sort of rubbish anyway.
However most of the time, this formal performance management process seems to fail – and fail everyone. People then become cynical about the process – managers feel unsupported by the process & the organisation. They think, “there’s no point putting people into the process, it doesn’t work”. Staff feel extremely threatened by the process, and it leaves a stigma on them. So the process becomes even harder, & underperformance is ignored or tolerated.
The result is underperformers keep underperforming. This means less productivity in a resources scarce environment – everyone seems to be trying to do more with less these days. But in this situation, more resources are needed because the ones there aren’t being utilised properly.
More often than not, as budget is tight, everyone else on the team gets loaded up with the work. Or more of the rare and valuable budget (taxpayers’ money!) has to be spent on more people being paid to fill the gap & do the job.
In addition, keeping on an underperformer & not addressing the situation can effect and lower the productivity of the rest of the team – they can become a cancer. It creates resentment, & breeds unhappiness – and further reduces productivity. Often, those hard-working team members who are performing well think, “why should I bust a gut when Joe Bloggs is swanning along at 50% capacity & still getting paid the same?”
Then what usually happens, what we call “The Forgotten Good Syndrome”, kicks in: the excellent performers drop down a notch to very good, the very good go to good, the good go to satisfactory, & the satisfactory become more underperformers. And productivity drops further.
So, why does this happen? And what can be done to change it?
In regards to why – well, performance management is usually seen by the organisation, managers and staff members, as a single, stand-alone step i.e. the final step…out!
Organisations and managers regularly jump straight into Step 3 (see Figure 1) & miss out on Steps 1 & 2.
A staff member gets put directly into Step 3, the formal performance management process…then, usually quite justifiably, appeals that process. The appeal is often upheld…because it comes to light that the person has never (or rarely) been told they’re doing a poor – or good – job in the first place.
They usually have not had any direct, constructive and meaningful feedback about their lack of performance, and little or no constructive feedback as to what to do to get up to the required standard. On top of that, there is often not a culture of regular, positive, constructive, enabling, motivating feedback on a day-to-day basis, so staff don’t know what they are doing right or wrong. The result is the staff member keeps doing what they think is the right thing.
Often there are no clear expectations, benchmarks & boundaries of what is expected of a person. And if there are, many managers fail to enforce these benchmarks & boundaries until they have been so badly eroded & the line is so blurred, it feels like it’s too late to do anything about it.
If a person hasn’t been told honestly, directly, constructively and respectfully by their manager that they are underperforming in the first place, is it fair that they are thrown straight into a formal performance management process? Of course not – so it fails.
If the person hasn’t been told honestly, constructively & respectfully by their supervisor what to do to improve their performance, asked what help they need to step up to the required standard & then given that help – how can they be expected to step up to the required benchmark? Is it fair that they are thrown straight into a formal performance management process? Of course not – so it fails.
If they don’t even know what the required benchmark is, if there is no clear standard of ‘satisfactory’, realistically, how can they be expected to meet that benchmark? It’s hard to justify, so the performance management process fails.
Before we go any further, let me clarify one thing – this is not to say it is all the manager’s fault. Not at all.
The individual must also take responsibility for asking for feedback on their performance. For clarifying with their manager what the required benchmarks are. They must take responsibility for asking for feedback on their performance, even if the manager isn’t giving it. That is something that rarely happens in many places – there is often an entitlement mentality, when everything is the manager’s fault. This shouldn’t be so, it is a two way street.
However, the manager must take a significant burden of the responsibility, as this is their job after all! But, many managers are not equipped to do this – few are trained in how to do any of it, and many understandably are scared of doing it and shy away as a result. This exacerbates the problem.
And when underperformance hasn’t been addressed, for whatever reason, when someone can & does step up & starts constructively addressing it, it creates a lot of tension, resentment and backlash. People can feel singled out & persecuted, and wonder why it has suddenly happened when things have been running this way for years… So complaints are often made, and so managers also feel persecuted…, then often it all becomes too difficult & quietly gets pushed aside.
So, what can be done?
Well, a good performance management process should be a performance improvement process. It should ideally encompass the steps in Figure 1. If you have Steps 1 & 2 in the organisation, then:
- Underperformance will be a lot less prevalent, if it exists at all – staff and managers will know what is required, staff will know what they are doing well & what they need to improve & will be asking for help. The Forgotten Good Syndrome will be a rare disease! And as John McGrath says, “catch people doing something right!”
- Underperformers are identified early, and given every available assistance to be successful, to improve, up-skill and step up. And they normally do. People rarely come to work to do a bad job!
- If people continue to underperform, they are put into a formal performance management system that gives them every possible chance of success in improving.
- If they haven’t stepped up to the required benchmark, given they have had all of the assistance above, is it then fair that they are asked to leave the organisation? Yes, I think most people would agree it is.
- We end up with a fair, equitable performance improvement/performance management system that works – for everyone!
Please contact us (02 9474 1005 or email info@southerncrosscoachbing.com.au) to find out more about our Performance Management & Performance Improvement Programs and how we can assist you develop Performance Management in your team and/or organisation.
Southern Cross Coaching & Development Pty Ltd (www.southerncrosscoaching.com.au) has worked with the Public Sector for many years, so we understand the nuances of the Public Sector and can work with you to achieve what you need.



