Fear of Firing - Weak Performance Management Is Part of the Problem...

Back in mid-March, I cut a post waxing poetic on the expectations of managers to fire employees for real or perceived performance issues without ever having a series of coaching conversations with them.  Sound familiar?  This week's issue of Business Week chimed in on the issue with a great piece on "Fear of Firing", citing the growing unwillingness on the part of companies to terminate low performers due to litigation risk.

From the BW article:

Indeed, at most companies HR is essentially a support function that gets called in only when a personnel problem has reached the crisis stage. At that point, the best they may be able to do is suggest the kind of risk-avoidance measures that drive managers crazy—such as requiring that an employee's deficiencies actually be documented in writing for an extended period before he or she is fired. This can be avoided, says Amy Rasner, a former HR manager in the fashion industry, if human resources personnel are teamed with line managers, working with them on an ongoing basis to develop and communicate specific, measurable performance objectives to employees.

In interview after interview, attorneys and HR execs say the biggest problem they confront in terminations is the failure of managers to have these kinds of conversations. In a 2005 Hewitt Associates (HEW ) survey of 129 major U.S. corporations, 72% said managers' ability to carry out performance management discussions and decisions effectively was the part of their personnel evaluation process most in need of improvement.

The reasons for this, of course, are varied. Some managers simply see the whole review process as a bureaucratic waste of time. It's also not easy to do. Many supervisors have been promoted into their jobs because they excelled in operations, not because they are skilled as managers. What's more, they've often spent a lot of time working alongside the very people they now oversee, so giving candid feedback to friends and former peers may be awkward. Managers in this position are "the biggest chickens on earth," says Fred Kiel, an executive-development consultant at KRW International Inc. in Minneapolis.

So there you have it - the issues you see as a HR Pro on a day-to-day basis - new managers who are technically strong but managerially weak, conflict avoidance in delivering the real message from a performance management standpoint, etc. - all contribute to make your workplace less productive than it could be.

What's a bootstrap HR Pro to do?  Focus on the stat in bold - 72% of the companies said managers' ability to carry out performance management discussions and decisions effectively was the part of their personnel evaluation process most in need of improvement.  Figure out your format on how managers should have these conversations and deliver training and skill practice to improve these skills.  In doing this, you'll give them the tools to focus on the performance message they need to deliver, rather than figuring out how to deliver it.

The result will be a healthier workplace - and fewer frustrated managers who blame HR for being the barrier to removing non-productive associates from your company. 

Comments

[Tom O'Brien]

Great post - I just posted on this subject last week - my conclusion? Companies that are not good at firing people are doomed to mediocre (or words) performance.

Not firing rewards the incompetent and insults your best performers.

You're Fired

Tom O'Brien

[BRA-DA]

Tom, it's all about training (and the trainers), and sometimes re-training! ...

... You just came out of ???, knowing everything you need to know? ...

RE: Not firing rewards the incompetent and insults your best performers.

... the incompetent TRAINERS ??????

YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM, AND THE SOLUTION(S)! LOL!!!!!!