If You Put A Gun To His Head…
“If you put a gun to his head, could he do it?” This was the startling question I learned to ask when I was first introduced to Human Performance Technology (HPT) in the early 90s. HPT is concerned with improving employee performance, and it considers a larger system context of people’s performance. A very simplistic (and rather disturbing) way of looking at the larger context is to ask, “Could he meet performance expectations if his life depended on it?” If the answer is “yes,” then the current performance issue is likely not a question of the employee’s ability but perhaps a question of motivation or confidence. If the answer is “no,” then it may be a matter of ability or the employee may not have the right tools or technology at her disposal to perform as expected. The gun to the head question uncovers whether a low performing employee needs training and follow up coaching (ability) OR a discussion about the consequences of continued poor performance and potential corrective action (willingness).
It’s an important distinction, the issue of ability or willingness, for two reasons. As stated above, it helps you determine the right course of action to help the employee remedy the issue. It also helps in making a case for termination, should it come to that.
A friend called me up a few years ago and asked for my advice. “You’re an HR Manager, “ he began, “tell me what should I do?” His manager had said that if he did not start doing X, Y, and Z at work, that he would very likely lose his job. An immediate change was needed. He was told he had ample time to demonstrate that he could perform differently and that his manager was committed to his success.
“Can you do X, Y, and Z?” was my first question. He replied that yes, he could make the requested changes. “And are you going to start doing X, Y, and Z?” was my next question. No. He had decided that he wouldn’t. He stated that he did not respect his manager, and that he disagreed that the change was necessary. Hmmmmm. I advised him to start looking for another job while he still had the current one. He wanted to know if there was no other course of action. There was none that I could see. If he was unwilling to make the changes requested by his manager, and if those changes weren’t unethical or illegal, than he would surely lose his job if he refused to make them.
He lost his job 2 months later.
This story has stuck with me as a reminder that when we’re addressing poor performance, we always need to assess whether it’s a question of lack of ability, lack of willingness, or both. As managers, it is in our best interest to capture any clear evidence of either circumstance in our documentation. If the employee has the ability to meet expectations, but refuses--or chooses not to expend the energy--it’s a matter of insubordination. And insubordination—even more than the initial pattern of poor performance—may help us to make the case to HR that termination is the appropriate course of action.
