PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
Set the standard. Manage the gap.
Poor performance rarely improves through uncertainty. Harrington Raine helps employers define what needs to change, structure improvement and manage formal capability where necessary — with clear advice and the documentation prepared for you.
Whether the issue is missed targets, repeated mistakes or a wider capability concern, we help you establish the right route and decide what happens next.
Queries received before 3pm on a working day receive a response that working day.
ADDRESSING PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT
Managers often know when performance is not where it needs to be. The harder part is deciding when — and how — to address it.
Left unmanaged, underperformance can begin to affect more than one employee. Deadlines slip. Mistakes create additional work. Stronger employees pick up the difference. Standards become harder to enforce because the business has allowed them to drift.
Avoiding the conversation rarely makes the eventual process easier.
The aim of performance management is not to manufacture a dismissal. It is to create clarity: what the business reasonably expects, where performance is falling short and whether the employee can improve to the required standard.
Good performance management gives both sides a fair understanding of the position.
For the employer, that means being able to identify the problem, explain what needs to change and assess improvement objectively.
For the employee, it means knowing what is expected of them and having a clear opportunity to respond.
Performance management should create clarity — for the employee and the business.
HOW WE SUPPORT EMPLOYERS
Performance problems rarely arrive neatly labelled. The first job is to understand what is actually going wrong, what the business reasonably expects and which management route fits the situation.
Harrington Raine can support you from the first conversation through to a formal capability outcome where necessary.
Identify where performance is falling short, what evidence exists and whether expectations have been sufficiently clear.
Define what acceptable performance looks like, how improvement will be measured and what the employee needs to achieve.
Structure early conversations, expectations and review points where a formal process is not yet necessary.
Where the issue needs formal management, we can help structure meetings, improvement periods, warnings and review stages.
Set appropriate objectives, measures, support and timescales without relying on arbitrary or one-size-fits-all PIP periods.
Prepare managers for performance and capability meetings, including the points to address, questions to ask and decisions that may follow.
Identify where ill health, disability or reasonable adjustments may affect how the performance issue should be managed.
Assess whether sufficient improvement has been achieved and advise on the appropriate next step — including further support, formal action or dismissal where justified.
Advice should leave you knowing what to do next — not simply what the law says.
BEFORE THE PROCESS
Before telling an employee that their performance is not good enough, the business should be able to explain what good performance actually looks like.
That sounds simple. In practice, many performance problems become difficult because expectations have never been made sufficiently clear.
The starting point is to establish four things:
01
What should the employee reasonably be achieving in their role?
02
What are they doing — or not doing — that falls below that standard?
03
Depending on the role, this might include missed deadlines, quality issues, repeated mistakes, customer outcomes, productivity measures, role responsibilities or management observations.
04
The employee should be able to understand what improvement looks like and how the business will judge whether it has happened.
Targets do not always need to be numerical. But expectations should be specific enough for the employee to understand them and for the employer to assess progress fairly.
Harrington Raine can help turn a broad concern about performance into clear expectations, measurable improvement points and a process managers can actually use.
CHOOSING THE RIGHT PROCESS
Two employees may produce the same poor result for very different reasons. Understanding why performance is falling short helps determine how the business should respond.
An employee who repeatedly misses deadlines, for example, might lack the required capability — or they might simply be ignoring reasonable instructions. Health problems may also affect what initially appears to be straightforward underperformance.
The facts matter.
A capability issue generally arises where an employee is trying to perform the role but is unable to meet the required standard.
The right response may involve clearer expectations, support, training, reasonable adjustments where relevant, an improvement period and formal capability management if performance does not improve.
A conduct issue is different. The employee may be capable of meeting the required standard but their behaviour, effort or failure to follow reasonable requirements is the real concern.
That may require a disciplinary route rather than treating the issue purely as poor performance.
STRUCTURING IMPROVEMENT
Not every performance problem needs a formal performance improvement plan. Sometimes a clear conversation, better management or additional support is enough.
Where a more structured approach is needed, however, the employee should understand exactly what needs to improve — and the employer should have a proper basis for deciding whether it has.
A performance improvement plan should not simply be given an arbitrary four, eight or twelve-week duration because that is what the business has always used.
The appropriate period depends on the circumstances — including the role, the extent of the performance gap, how quickly genuine improvement can reasonably be demonstrated and what has already happened.
The review matters just as much as the plan.
At the end of the period, the business needs to assess the evidence objectively and decide whether the employee has improved sufficiently, more time or support is appropriate, or the process needs to move forward.
A PIP should create a route to a decision — not simply extend a performance problem.
The performance gap:
What is currently falling below the required standard?
The improvement required:
What does acceptable performance look like in practical terms?
How progress will be measured:
What evidence will be used to assess whether sufficient improvement has taken place?
What support is available:
Does the employee need training, clearer instruction, additional resources or another form of reasonable support?
When performance will be reviewed:
Set a timescale that makes sense for the role, the problem and the improvement required.
What happens if improvement is insufficient:
The employee should understand the possible next stage if the required standard is not achieved.
HOW HARRINGTON RAINE HELPS
Performance management becomes easier when managers know what they are trying to achieve, what route to take and what needs to happen next.
Harrington Raine helps turn a vague concern about underperformance into a clear, structured process.
01
We establish the performance issue, the standard the business needs and the outcome you are trying to achieve.
02
We review the evidence, what has already happened and any factors that may affect the route — including health, disability, previous management or inconsistent expectations.
03
We take a position on what should happen next. That may be an informal intervention, structured improvement, a formal capability process or another route altogether.
04
Where documentation is needed, we prepare it for you. That can include: meeting invitations; manager scripts; performance improvement documentation; review letters; warning letters; capability correspondence; outcome letters; and dismissal correspondence where appropriate.
05
We help assess whether sufficient improvement has been achieved and recommend the appropriate next step.
You should not finish an advice call knowing only what the law says. You should know what to do next — and have the paperwork needed to do it.
WHEN THE FACTS CHANGE THE ROUTE
Some underperformance cases can be managed relatively simply. Others need more care because the wider circumstances affect what the employer should do next.
Performance problems can sometimes be connected to an underlying health condition or disability. That may affect the process, the support required and whether reasonable adjustments need to be considered.
An employee may challenge the way performance concerns are being handled or raise a separate complaint during the process. The two issues may need to be considered together rather than managed in isolation.
Where the employee has raised protected concerns or alleges discriminatory treatment, the business should understand whether those circumstances change the risk around the proposed action.
A process becomes harder to defend if standards have varied between employees, changed without explanation or have not been enforced consistently.
Longstanding underperformance does not mean the business can never act. But where weak performance has been accepted for months or years, managers may need to reset expectations clearly before relying on them.
Capability issues involving senior, highly paid or operationally important employees can carry wider commercial consequences and may require a more strategic approach.
Once dismissal is being considered, the quality of the earlier process, evidence, warnings and decision-making becomes increasingly important.
The right route depends on the whole situation — not simply the performance score.
Harrington Raine helps employers identify which factors genuinely alter the process, which do not, and what should happen next.
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT FAQs
Performance issues are fact-sensitive. These are some of the questions employers commonly ask when deciding how to manage an underperforming employee.
Related employer support:
Broader advice on difficult employment decisions.
Ongoing advice, drafting and day-to-day employer support.
Support if an employment dispute becomes a Tribunal claim.
See the options for ongoing HR & Employment Law support.
Start by identifying the required standard, where the employee is falling short and what evidence demonstrates the problem.
The employee should understand the concern and have an opportunity to respond. Depending on the circumstances, the next step might be informal management, additional support, a structured improvement period or a formal capability process.
The appropriate route should reflect the seriousness of the problem and what has already happened.
A performance improvement plan, often called a PIP, is a structured way of setting out what needs to improve and how progress will be assessed.
A useful plan will usually identify the performance concerns, required standards, objectives, review period and any relevant support or training. It should also explain what may happen if sufficient improvement is not achieved.
Not every performance problem requires a formal PIP.
There is no standard period that every PIP must follow.
The appropriate timescale depends on factors such as the role, the extent of the performance gap, how quickly genuine improvement can reasonably be demonstrated and what has already happened.
The important question is whether the employee has been given a reasonable opportunity to achieve the required improvement — not whether the process has lasted an arbitrary number of weeks.
Where dismissal may ultimately result from poor performance, the employee will normally need to understand the concerns, the improvement required and the potential consequences if performance does not improve.
There is no universal rule that every employer must issue exactly three warnings. The appropriate stages depend on the circumstances and applicable procedure.
What matters is that the employer acts reasonably and follows a fair process.
Poor performance or capability generally concerns whether an employee is able to perform their role to the required standard.
Misconduct concerns behaviour. An employee may be capable of meeting the required standard but fail to do so because they are unwilling to follow reasonable instructions or expectations.
The distinction matters because it can affect the process the employer should follow.
Potentially, yes. Capability — including an employee being unable to perform their job to the required standard — can be a fair reason for dismissal.
However, having a potentially fair reason does not automatically make the dismissal fair. The employer should act reasonably, establish the performance problem and follow an appropriate process before reaching its decision.
Dismissal should not be treated as the predetermined outcome of a performance process.
The employer should establish whether a health condition is contributing to the problem before treating it as straightforward underperformance.
Where an employee is disabled, the Equality Act 2010 may require reasonable adjustments. Adjustments or other support may also enable the employee to perform their role successfully.
Health-related capability cases therefore often need a different approach from ordinary performance management.
The plan should make the problem and the required improvement clear.
Depending on the circumstances, it may include specific objectives, performance standards, how progress will be assessed, available support or training, review dates and the potential consequences if sufficient improvement is not achieved.
Objectives should be meaningful for the particular role rather than inserted simply because they are easy to measure.
Disagreement does not prevent an employer from managing genuine performance concerns, but the employee should have an opportunity to understand the evidence and explain their position.
Their response may identify relevant information the employer had not considered. Equally, an employee simply disagreeing with reasonable, evidenced concerns does not mean the process has to stop.
The employer should consider the explanation objectively and then decide how to proceed.
Poor performance should be addressed during probation rather than left until the final review.
The employee should understand where they are falling short, what standard is expected and what they need to do to improve. Regular reviews, clear feedback and appropriate support or training can help establish whether the employee is likely to succeed in the role.
Where performance remains below the required standard, the employer may consider extending probation if this is appropriate and permitted by the relevant contractual or policy arrangements, or ending employment following an appropriate process.
Probation should not be treated as removing the need to consider issues such as discrimination, disability, whistleblowing or contractual rights.
Yes. An extension may be appropriate where the employee has made progress but has not yet reached the required standard, particularly where there is a reasonable prospect of further improvement.
An extension should have a purpose. The employer should make clear what still needs to improve, how progress will be assessed, what further support is available and when the position will be reviewed again.
Repeatedly extending a PIP without making a decision can simply prolong the underlying problem.
Employers should keep clear records showing what the performance concern is and how it has been managed.
Depending on the situation, that could include performance data, examples of errors or missed deadlines, review notes, correspondence, agreed objectives, records of support or training, performance improvement plans and formal warnings.
The evidence should demonstrate the actual performance problem rather than simply record a manager's general opinion that somebody is “not good enough”.
Good documentation also helps the employer assess improvement consistently and explain how any eventual decision was reached.
Not necessarily. A formal PIP is not a mandatory stage in every performance-management case.
Employers should usually consider whether the problem can be resolved through feedback, support, coaching, training or another informal intervention before escalating matters. Where formal action becomes appropriate, the precise process will depend on the circumstances and the employer's applicable procedures.
The important point is that the employee understands the performance concern, what improvement is required and the potential consequences if sufficient improvement is not achieved.
A PIP can be a useful way of providing that structure, but the process should fit the problem rather than the other way around.
If an employee is not meeting the required standard, we can help you assess the position, decide the right route and manage what happens next.
You will get clear advice on the approach we recommend, with the documentation prepared where required.
Prefer to speak now?
SPEAK TO AN ADVISOR
Leave your details and a member of the Harrington Raine team will get back to you to understand what you need and how we can help.
YOUR PROPOSAL
We've already captured the pricing you've selected. Tell us where to send your proposal and an adviser will take it from there.
