Addressing poor performance in an early stage startup
I took a call today from a founder friend several months into his startup asking for advice on dealing with a poor performer they recently hired. The request was familiar to me, I've heard variations on the theme several times: "That engineer we hired a couple of months ago? They're doing alright, but not quite at the pace we need. They have a few weeks until their probation is up, would love some advice on how to handle it".
Every time we add a person to our company, we take on risk. All hiring assessments are imperfect. The only guarantee is if you hire enough people you'll eventually have to deal with a poor performer.
While we can't be perfect in our hiring process—and we don't aim to be, as when striving to better we mar what’s well—we must take the right actions once we realise the new member of the team isn't performing as needed. Doing so helps you, the employee, your team, and the company.
You hired somebody to perform a job for your company. If they're not doing that then the company isn't making the progress you need. Your team should delight and surprise you, adding value to the company beyond what you hoped.
The downsides go beyond simply not making the progress required. Poor performers slow others in the team down too. Colleagues have to make up the work not completed, or redo parts of it, distracting them from their own goals. Excessive hand holding and training also takes up time and focus (be careful here as some amounts of each are required, especially in the early stages).
Your team knows when a colleague isn't performing. Keeping a low quality performer in the team sends a message to them that the demonstrated level of performance is acceptable. Intrinsically motivated people need to work with great colleagues, they want to be pushed and continually learn. You're the guardian of the quality bar at your company and your team is looking to you to keep it high.
It's kind to the employee to get this part of the process right. They're unlikely to be enjoying the struggle if it's not going to work out. And keeping them in place with a false hope of progress means they're missing out on opportunities elsewhere where they can flourish. Poor performance is rarely a function of just the person, nearly everybody will find somewhere they can shine. By not addressing the situation you're denying them the chance to find their ideal place.
Humans are natural avoiders of conflict. There are various reasons that apply in different amounts to different people. Conflict takes up energy. We fear upsetting people. Our brains release adrenaline and cortisol even in anticipation of hard discussions, a throwback to when fight or flight was necessary for our physical survival.
Luckily, our rational brains can fight back if we understand what's happening. One of Thread's values is candour, which encourages us to respond to the anticipation of threat by rationalising what the right action is. It's a reminder that to make the best long-term decision we have to overcome the biological wiring that helped humans survive in the face of prehistoric threats.
When confronted with these obstacles to conflict, we shy away from it. We retrofit excuses such as “maybe they'll come good in a few weeks”, or “maybe we didn't set them up for success”. You must inspect these excuses carefully. You probably haven't set them up for success as well as you could have, and you have to give people time to get used to how things work in a new environment. This is particularly true for those with less experience — be very careful that you're not attributing poor performance to the individual when your company isn't giving them any chance.
Equally, be careful that you're not trying to kid yourself. It's always possible to say you could have done better and you can always give people more time. But make sure you're not self-flagellating as an excuse to avoid the hard decision.
When you believe that a people-first mindset is the key to a successful team, it's always surprising how much better the situation is for everybody involved.
We want to:
Treat the employee as well as possible.
Give the employee every chance to succeed. Act quickly when there's a decision to be made.
Ensure that the company doesn't suffer from the poor performance.
Ensure that the team doesn't suffer.
Be as clear as possible that their performance doesn't match your expectations, and inform them as soon as you know. It's common to delay this stage, especially if we're not 100% sure. This is a mistake. Face the problem and work to remedy it.
The initial conversation should be empathetic, kind, direct, and clear. The goal is to uncover anything preventing the employee from reaching the level of performance that's needed.
Work with them: “Looking at the past couple of weeks, the volume of your output hasn't been at the level I'd expect. Is there anything I can do to help you improve?” You may discover you haven't set expectations correctly, or there's something they feel they couldn't speak to you about that's slowing them down.
Set a goal. As you're addressing this early, you don't have to rush this stage. “Let's see how we get on in the next couple of weeks. We can chat every couple of days, but I'm always here if you need anything.”
The biggest mistake you can make is getting to the point you have to let the person go, and it's a surprise to them. Give them every chance to succeed, and do everything you can to help them. Think about the situation from their perspective — it's a new company with new people, they may be junior, working with new tools, and may have nerves or external issues affecting their ability to do good work. You're putting more pressure on them, which is necessary to prevent surprises further down the line, so you have to do what you can to give them an environment in which they can succeed.
Always be kind. Kindness and candour are not mutually exclusive. Don't water down your message, but never be a dick about it.
Netflix uses the 'keeper test'. The manager asks themselves: “If this person was thinking of leaving for another company, would I try hard to keep them from leaving?” If the answer is “no”, then you should let them go. Whether you employ this technique or not, it's important that you get confident in your decision.
Part ways with as much compassion as you can. Be generous with notice periods and leave. An extra week or two's salary may not mean much to your company's runway, but it means a lot to somebody who has to begin a job search again.
Emphasise that it's a company fit issue — there's nearly always a place where people will shine. Help them work out where they may work best, for example if it's a pace issue then a larger company could help give them the structure to be more productive. Asking people to leave has been the least enjoyable part of my career by far. It hasn't become any easier. The sleepless nights preceding it give me some comfort that I've put as much thought and effort into their time at the company as I could have done — we can't do more than that if it's just not working out.