Recruiters and HR leaders are under a lot of pressure to identify top talent to present to hiring managers. However, some traits and behaviors can slip past even the most rigorous screening process: recruiters can screen for skills, culture fit, and many personality traits, but without the ability to predict the future, they can’t always identify candidates who may turn out to be low performers.  

Low performers can have multiple negative effects on an organization. Primarily, they lower the morale of the entire workplace. But they also “[contribute] to a lack of initiative and motivation, resulting in a work culture where mediocrity is accepted” and add to the workload of high performers.¹ 

One effective strategy for handling low performers is to address their behavior during a probationary period. Unfortunately, low performers often don’t exhibit that behavior until after their first 90 days on the job (and sometimes high performers can become low performers). Therefore it’s important that managers and supervisors understand how to address a low performer once they have been identified. 

The Impact of Low Performers

It can be nearly impossible to identify low-performing job candidates before offering them a job. One survey suggests an uphill battle for recruiters and hiring managers, with only 40 percent of respondents reporting that their company “does a good job of hiring and recruiting high performers.”²  

In order for managers to get better at identifying low performers, they must understand how these employees affect the rest of the workforce. Failure to address their performance issues can damage not only morale but also hurt the organization’s bottom line. A company that doesn’t deal with “toxic” low performers risks both weakening its culture and driving away its highest performers—leaving it with a workforce that is mediocre at best. 

Behaviors of Low Performers

Every manager knows the frustration that comes from trying to coach or mentor team members who do the minimum to “get by” and exhibit some (or all) of the behaviors typical of low performers. 

Passing the buck. Top-performing employees never say, “It’s not my job.” A high performer recognizes that they’re part of a team and are willing to adapt to changes in the workplace. Low performers tend to resist change and stick to what they were hired to do—and only what they were hired to do. This behavior can be mitigated by making sure a job description explicitly states the expectation of development, growth, and additional challenges.  

A lack of motivation. Motivation can drive even someone with average ability to achieve an above-average performance. But without that motivation—which indicates a willingness to develop, learn, improve, and contribute more—an employee is unlikely to push themself past low-performance levels. 

Constant complaining. Complaints often reveal that someone is unwilling to put in the work to make a change. It’s almost always easier to complain than to be productive. 

Making excuses. It’s bound to happen from time to time that things don’t get done because something else takes priority. If things aren’t getting done because of an unfair excuse, however, that’s a problem with the employee. An employee who seems to have an excuse for everything might actually be a low performer. 

Caring a lot about credit. Low performers worry about being productive only if it will get them credit in the long run. Being truly productive requires someone to be creative and innovative in their role, not simply do what they’re told. Most workplace accomplishments are collaborative efforts, and someone who does things only for personal gain is not looking out for their team or the company. 

Low performers also exhibit many other red flags. They gossip. They neglect to bring up important issues in meetings but will discuss them at length outside of team meetings. They’re negative. They are “clock watchers” who already have one foot out the door as the end of the day approaches. They think they can’t be replaced. They focus on past experience instead of current achievement. 

Once managers understand how to identify low performers, they can take the next step: addressing their behavior. 

The Solution: Continuous Performance Management

Unlike the “traditional” practice of annual reviews, continuous performance management takes place year round and incorporates regular feedback. HR professionals are increasingly finding that annual reviews do not deliver on critical business outcomes. These types of reviews “cause tension and anxiety for both employees and managers,” don’t give managers “the skills to provide constructive feedback and don’t deliver the better quality and more frequent feedback that . . . employees crave.”³ However, companies that adopt a continuous permanence management process enjoy significant improvement in all of those problem areas. In one survey, respondents reported that this practice led to a 39 percent reduction in failure to provide useful feedback, a 34 percent reduction in excessive subjectivity in reviews, a 32 percent reduction in “reviews failing to improve performance,” and a 27 percent reduction in the review process’s ability to help an organization keep top talent.⁴ 

How to Approach Low-Performing Employees

First and foremost, managers must have a consistent conversation with all team members, without singling out specific employees. Because continuous performance management is designed to address low-performing employees, it should include ongoing feedback with very specific goals and performance indicators as well as clear expectations for improvement. 

Second, managers must document their efforts to address low performance. If a company’s performance management process isn’t enough to encourage a low-performing employee to improve, termination may be necessary. Regardless of whether state laws suggest or require it, managers should always document their coaching efforts well before they let a low performer go. 

Third, performance feedback must be given a regular and frequent schedule (e.g., biweekly, monthly, quarterly) and include key points, suggestions, and examples. Continuous performance management works better than annual reviews because it gives a low performer a finite amount of time to improve—and it gives them less time to drain a company’s resources and budget (and the morale of the rest of the team). 

Lastly, managers should consider using performance management technology that seamlessly integrates with other workplace technologies (e-mail, project management tools, direct messaging platforms, etc.) to make it easy to update goals, share changes, and keep on top of each team member’s performance and results. 

By understanding what they’re looking for (and what’s at stake), managers can be better prepared to handle low-performing employees. Nipping problematic behaviors in the bud can stave off bigger problems down the road, and—when it includes the right interventions and encouragement—might even succeed in helping low performers to up their game.