As an executive coach, I spend much of my time helping companies build championship, top-performing teams. I have found that winning teams are always brilliant on the basics, and they don’t settle for anything less than excellence from their team.
In the past year, two of my clients made the decision to let a key person go for under-performance. In both cases, these people had worked for the company for several years, and they were also well liked. The challenge was that they did not deliver on what they had committed to, and they both had more than enough time and opportunity to come around. It was a tough decision for both companies. They came to the realization that success in business is a blend of the head and the heart.
Here is what happens: In working with my clients, I help give them the structure and discipline to become strong in three key categories: Ownership, clarity, and accountability. Once these key competencies were up to standard, it became clear that one of the team members was not meeting clearly defined expectations, and part of the teams working agreement specified that under-performance would not be acceptable.
When we are on a winning team and want to be the best, we resent it when someone is not doing their fair share. Excuses and finger-pointing just don’t cut it. Tolerating under-performance is a lose-lose situation. Both sides are frustrated, and nobody wins. If you want to be on top and stay on top, everyone must have an “oar” in their hand and row briskly.
