The Work Clinic

In a recent article by Personnel Today called Should HR advise managers to cull less-effective staff, or work with them to improve performance?, we debated whether sacking poor performers was a good idea or not:

For:
Steve Ballmer, chief executive, Microsoft
Admitted to culling one in every 15 employees every year and suggests that all businesses, large and small, would benefit from such an approach.

John Rose, chief executive, talent management consultancy Hudson UK
Retaining for the sake of retaining will help solve neither the UK’s skills crisis nor its increasing productivity gap. It’s not good for a company’s long-term health or the
career progression of the individual. In the Hudson survey, Cull or cure: the secret of an efficient company?, 77% of senior executives believe that a fixed quota for annual staff dismissal would boost financial performance and productivity.

Chris Welford, director of talent and assessment, HR consultancy Penna
Culling can even be good for those who get fired. The initial reaction to this idea is horror. However, if you think it through, it's more sensible than it sounds. Most people have skills, but they're not always used in the right way.

Against:
Cathy Monaghan, head of HR, reward consultancy PES
This is a great idea if you want to manage through fear, retribution and paranoia, and create a general air of unease. This sort of culling makes people focus on appearing productive, leads to short-termism, and attracts the wrong sort of employees. It's also expensive, as you incur recruitment costs to replace the staff you have culled.

Chris Howe, director, HR and change management consultancy ChangeMaker
If you pick an arbitrary number such as 15%, how do you know that is right? What if you have only 7% of underachievers, and you are therefore throwing out 8% of good people?

Hamish Cameron Blackie, partner at accountancy firm and UK200Group member Barlow Robbins
Culling the bottom performers will only ever motivate those on the cusp of success or failure. Those who are at the bottom of the performance table will be demotivated and will not care about their performance any longer. Those in the middle ground, but comfortably distant from the danger of being dismissed, won't care about the policy either.

Nadia Motraghi, barrister specialising in employment law at Old Square Chambers
It doesn't appear to be a genuine redundancy situation, because the workforce cull appears unrelated to the level of work that needs to be carried out and the number of employees needed to do that work. From a legal perspective, regular staff culls are likely to require employers to get their chequebooks out.

Top tips to maximise employee performance from Hudson’s talent management team:

• Identify your organisation’s values and the skills required for maximum performance.
• During the recruitment process, rigorously compare candidates’ capabilities against the longterm needs and objectives of the organisation.
• Assess all your current staff regularly, and compare their skills and aptitude against
the organisation’s requirements.
• Provide strong development plans, good compensation schemes, ample holidays and a fun environment in which to work.
• Be honest – there is no point pretending that everyone is right in terms of their skills, attitude and cultural fit. Provide targets and timeframes in which underperformers must improve - and stick to them.
• Don’t cover up. Should you dismiss any employees, be open and honest with the rest of your staff and make it clear that you are pleased with their performance and excited about the future direction of the business.
• Establish your dismissal figure for the year. With strong recruitment and talent management practices, work hard to reduce this in the following year.