It’s not you, it’s me…

The primary reason project team members underperform is because of a failure of management or leadership.

As we discussed in the earlier topic on delegation, if we have made reasonable task assignments (responding appropriately to the unique combinations of skill and will each person brings to their role), we must still ensure that we are not placing any ‘hills‘ in the way of their performance.

In those limited circumstances where a team member’s personal issues impact their performance, you may need to make allowances to ensure project delivery targets are met, noting that you may also be able to reset stakeholder expectations without penalty if you approach the matter with sensitivity.

The key, though, is to act early.

The longer you take to identify and respond to under-performance, the more time and resources it will take to resolve the issue.

The cost of change principle – including the implications for uncertainty and risk – applies equally here!

---

When all else fails…

Very occasionally, such as when a team member actively disrupts delivery, you need to remove underperforming individuals from the project.

Most organizations have a process for this within their business-as-usual activities, so is it that different for projects? 

Well, yes and no.

Because many project team members are engaged as contractors, you can look to the terms of their contract as to how under-performance can be managed and their services terminated. 

Legal advice in this regard may also be helpful, depending on the size and nature of the contract.

Regardless of whether they are directly employed or contracted, your first step in managing under-performance should be to talk to the team member’s line manager (if they do not report directly to you), and your organization’s human resource manager or other, independent experts. 

This will ensure you follow workplace and statutory processes relating to escalation, representation, and formal notices.

You will also need to document evidence of non-performance, including records of relevant meetings or conversations you may have had with the individual.

You can then have an open conversation with the under-performing team member at an appropriate time. 

• Discuss all the issues and the impacts they are having on the project and other team members
• Listen
• Mutually identify potential causes to address – don’t just treat the symptoms
• Agree to resolution strategies
• Set SMART goals to achieve this in the form of a formal performance plan, including interim targets, and
• Outline the potential consequences for continued under-performance.

As highlighted in the last lesson, the sooner you identify and address problems, the easier they are to resolve. 

Nonetheless, you may need to have a number of these meetings, with escalating degrees of formality, if change is not realized and the project continues to be jeopardized.

Yet, quite often in projects, our objective is not to sack a team member; rather, it is to have them reassigned out of the project. 

Noting that this is a less severe form of separation, you should always aim for reassignment over dismissal, as this is generally a quicker path and results in the least disruption to your project and the team.

It should be pointed out that all of this assumes that high levels of team member support have proven ineffective. Separating team members from the project should always be a last resort.