Why waiting too long to act on poor performance harms your whole team

Hi {{first_name|there}},

Over the last two weeks we have looked at dealing with an under-performing team member. This week we look at what to do when, despite your best efforts, there is no improvement.

As I mentioned before, in my view, we should deal with performance issues as supportively as possible. But the reality is that some people will not respond however well you support them.

Sometimes the job just isn't right for them. Sometimes they are not willing to put in the effort and commitment the job needs. Either way, you end up with a tough decision to make and, understandably, it is one that most of us put off for too long.

In this situation, we will need to follow some kind of formal process that ultimately leads to a dismissal (or a move to a different role), and that is never easy for the leader or the team member. But even within that process, as you will see from the research referred to below, it is important to continue to treat the person who is struggling with decency and respect. So, in this piece, we will look at how we can best do that and not suffer too many sleepless nights along the way.

Just to be clear, what we are considering here is under-performance, not egregious conduct. Serious misconduct issues like theft or harassment will normally be subject to formal investigations and potentially suspensions or summary dismissal.

If we put off the important conversations we need to have about under-performance, it is not just the under-performer who is affected. Here is what the research tells us about how other team members may react:

At a more organisational level:

This doesn't mean you should be quick to get rid of people. But while you are giving somebody the benefit of the doubt, somebody else is probably picking up the slack, and they will notice whether you do anything about it.

So, what can you do in practice when somebody is still not improving? Obviously, you will need to follow your own organisation's protocols, but here are five steps that will help you handle the situation as fairly as you can.

1. Make sure you really have given it a fair go

We need to be wary of what some researchers have called the 'set-up-to-fail syndrome' (Manzoni & Barsoux, 1998). This is the pattern where a manager decides somebody is a weak performer and, without meaning to, starts checking their work more closely and giving them less interesting work to do. The person then loses confidence and their performance drops further, which of course confirms what the manager thought in the first place.

So, before you go any further, ask yourself these questions:

I suspect the last question is the most powerful one, but if your genuine answer to any of these is no, you may need to go back a step.

2. Be honest with them about where things stand

If support has not worked, the person needs to know that. In fact, this needs to be said early and repeatedly during the time they have been given to improve. It is not fair to anybody for them to find out at a formal meeting that things are much more serious than they thought.

The kindest thing you can do is to be clear about what has not changed, what still needs to change, by when, and what will happen if it doesn't. Then keep offering support.

There is more on how to manage the difficult conversation you'd rather avoid here.

3. Look at whether a different role would suit them better

Somebody who is struggling in one role may do well in another. So, if the problem looks like a mismatch between the person's strengths and what the job demands, rather than a lack of effort, consider whether there is a role in your team, or elsewhere in the organisation, that would suit them better. In the UK, the Acas guidance expects employers to consider this before dismissing somebody for poor performance anyway (Acas, 2026).

A different but suitable alternative role is often the best outcome. So have an early conversation about what kind of work they enjoy and do well, and whether they think the role is right for them.

4. Follow a fair process, and give them a voice in it

If there is no improvement and no suitable alternative, you will need to use your organisation's formal process. Get your HR team involved early so that you treat the person consistently with everybody else. If you are in the UK, the Acas Code of Practice requires clear standards, support and a reasonable time to improve, proper warnings and a right of appeal (Acas, 2015).

There is surprisingly little good evidence that formal performance processes actually do improve performance (Murphy, 2026), but it would be a mistake to treat this as box-ticking. Here is what the research on fairness (what researchers call 'organisational justice') tells us:

5. If it must end, end it with dignity

If the person does have to leave, how you handle the final conversation matters a great deal. Manuela Richter and colleagues found that being treated with respect was the most consistent factor in whether people felt a dismissal was fair, and in how they felt about their employer afterwards. People also wanted a proper explanation, and they wanted it from their own manager rather than somebody brought in to deliver the news (Richter et al., 2018).

There is a natural pull in the other direction. Robert Folger and Daniel Skarlicki found that managers who felt some responsibility for the situation tended to distance themselves, spending less time in dismissal meetings and being more abrupt (Folger & Skarlicki, 1998). While this is understandable, because nobody enjoys this conversation, being short and abrupt denies the person the respect that is critical to them.

So, have the conversation yourself and give it the time it needs. Explain the reasons and listen to what they have to say. Be clear, too, about what further support they will get. If you can, give them some say in how their departure is explained to the rest of the team.

When somebody leaves, the rest of your team will draw their own conclusions from how it was handled, and as we have seen, they react much better when the process was fair and their colleague was treated with respect (Brockner et al., 1994). You will not be able to share the details, but you can answer their questions as honestly as you can and think about any extra workload that falls on them.

It is also important that you look after yourself. Grunberg and colleagues found that managers who had carried out layoffs had more stress-related health problems for years afterwards than managers who had not (Grunberg et al., 2006). That research is about large-scale layoffs, but none of these decisions are easy. So, talk it through with somebody you trust and make sure you get appropriate support from your own boss.

None of us takes on a leadership role wanting to ask somebody to leave.

But dealing with it fairly and humanely, rather than letting it drift, gives the person clarity and a genuine chance either to put things right or to move on to something that suits them better.

And it is much fairer on the rest of your team.

If you have done the work in the earlier stages, you can take the decision knowing that you gave them every reasonable chance and treated them fairly and with respect.

You will sleep easier at night too.

If you are dealing with a situation like this and there is something you would like me to cover, hit reply and let me know.

All of my posts for new leaders are here.

Coaching. If you have somebody in your team who still isn't improving and you are facing a decision about what happens next, I can help. Thinking through the options, and how you will handle the conversation, is exactly the kind of thing that is helpful to talk through with somebody before you act. There are more details here.