Few things corrode morale more than working with people who aren’t pulling their weight and aren’t performing. We all want to work alongside people who inspire and energize us and if under-performers go un-dealt with, it really is hard to retain star performers.
I’m not suggesting an Enron style sack the bottom 15%. This is wrong for a whole raft of different reasons. However, working closely with staff to improve their performance and actively managing staff in to new roles elsewhere if they don’t improve is extremely sensible.
We’re heading towards phrases here like High Performance Culture. I hear that as an aspiration quite a lot, but I’m worried that jargonizing it and turning it in to something complex moves us backwards rather than forwards.
If we want staff to perform well, it doesn’t have to be complicated. Are they clear what they need to do, and what constitutes doing it well? And do they have room to bring a little bit of their own personality to the party.
If they won’t or can’t improve with your full support, then moving them on is in everyone’s best interests.