How to Manage an Underperforming Employee
How to diagnose whether it is skill, will or clarity, run the direct conversation, and set a fair improvement period, before HR needs to get involved.
You have watched it happen for weeks now: missed deadlines, work that needs redoing, a person on your team who used to be reliable and is not anymore. You have avoided the conversation because it feels awkward, or because you are hoping it fixes itself, or because you genuinely do not know what to say that will not come across as either too soft or too harsh.
It will not fix itself, and waiting makes the eventual conversation harder, not easier. The good news is that managing an underperforming employee is a structured skill you can learn, not a personality trait some managers have and others do not.
The first step in managing an underperforming employee is diagnosing whether the gap is skill, will, or clarity, because each one needs a different fix. Then have a direct, private conversation with specific examples, agree on what changes and by when, and set a fair improvement period with clear checkpoints rather than one vague warning and a long silence.
How do I manage an underperforming employee: start with the diagnosis
Before you say a word to the person, figure out which of three things is actually happening. Guessing wrong here is the most common mistake managers make, because the conversation and the fix look completely different depending on the cause.
- Skill gap. They understand what is expected and want to do it, but do not yet have the ability. Look for effort without competence: they are trying, but the output is consistently off.
- Will gap. They have the skill but are not applying it, often because of disengagement, burnout, a personal issue, or a mismatch with the role. Look for competence without effort: work that used to be strong has gotten sloppy or late with no clear reason.
- Clarity gap. They do not actually know what “good” looks like for this role, or expectations shifted and no one told them clearly. This one is far more common than most managers assume, and it is entirely fixable by the manager restating the expectation more specifically.
Ask yourself: if I gave this person one clear, specific instruction right now, could they execute it well? If yes, you likely have a will or clarity problem. If no, even with a clear instruction, you likely have a skill problem. This single question will point you toward the right conversation faster than any personality read.
Dealing with poor performance: the conversation itself
Have this conversation privately, promptly, and specifically. Waiting for a pattern to become undeniable, or having the conversation in a group setting, both make it worse.
Framework: name it, ask, agree, write it down.
- Name the specific gap. Use concrete examples, not generalities. “You’ve missed the last three Monday deliverables” lands. “You need to be more reliable” does not, because it gives the person nothing to fix.
- Ask what they see. Stop talking after you name the gap and actually listen. They may reveal a will problem (“I’ve been overwhelmed since my second project got added”), a skill problem (“I honestly don’t know how to build that report correctly”), or a clarity problem (“I thought Fridays were fine, not Mondays”).
- Agree on what changes. State specifically what needs to be different, by when, and how you will both know it improved. Vague agreements produce vague results.
- Write it down. A short follow-up email summarizing what was discussed and agreed protects both of you and removes any later ambiguity about what was actually said.
Performance conversation script:
“I want to talk about the last three deliverables. Each one came in a day or two late, and the client noticed on the last one. Can you walk me through what’s been happening?”
[Listen fully before responding.]
“That makes sense, thanks for telling me. Here’s what I need going forward: deliverables in by end of day Monday, and if something is going to be late, a heads-up to me by Friday so I’m not surprised. Let’s check in again in two weeks. Does that work, and is there anything on my end that would help?”
Notice the last line. Asking what would help from your end is not weakness, it surfaces resourcing or clarity problems you might be contributing to without realizing it.
Underperforming team member: what to do if the first conversation does not fix it
If performance has not improved after your agreed timeline, move to a formal improvement plan. This is the point to loop in HR, both to confirm your documentation is sound and to make sure the plan is consistent with company policy.
A fair improvement plan has three parts:
| Element | What it should include |
|---|---|
| Specific expectations | Named, measurable, tied to the actual gaps discussed |
| Timeline | 30 to 90 days depending on complexity, with checkpoints during, not just at the end |
| Support offered | Training, resources, or adjusted workload the manager will provide |
Thirty days fits a narrow, specific gap, like consistently missed deadlines on a known process. Sixty to ninety days fits broader gaps, such as a newly promoted manager still building core skills. Set at least one or two check-in dates during the period, not only a final review, so there are no surprises about whether things are on track.
How long should I give someone to improve, and how do I know if it is working
Track progress against the specific behaviors you named, not against your general impression of the person. If you agreed deadlines would be hit and two of the next three are on time, that is measurable progress even if it is not perfect. If nothing has moved by the midpoint check-in, say so directly rather than waiting for the final deadline to deliver bad news the person had no warning about.
Resist two common traps here. The first is extending the timeline repeatedly without a real conversation about why nothing changed, which is unfair to the rest of your team who is picking up the slack. The second is moving to termination the moment the improvement period ends without acknowledging real, partial progress, which can feel arbitrary to the person and undermine trust with everyone else who saw the process play out.
When to involve HR
Loop in HR before you start any formal improvement plan, and immediately if the situation touches a medical or family issue, a harassment or conduct complaint, or anything with legal exposure. For an early, informal conversation about a performance dip, you can usually handle that one-on-one. Once you are documenting a pattern that could lead to a formal plan or termination, get HR involved early rather than after you have already built a file. This is a management and process question, not a legal one, and for anything that clearly is legal, that is exactly the point to bring in HR or counsel rather than navigate it yourself.
The part managers avoid the most
Most managers do not struggle with the framework here, they struggle with actually opening their mouth and starting the conversation. Rehearsing the specific words out loud, ideally with someone who will push back the way the employee might, makes the real conversation far less nerve-wracking. Executive coaching is a place to build that muscle before you need it in the moment, alongside our guide on how to know if you’re ready for leadership for more on the harder conversations that come with the role.
If you want to practice this exact conversation before you have it for real, with a coach who has managed teams and can tell you plainly whether your script will land, take the two-minute quiz and get matched with someone who has been on both sides of this exact conversation.
Frequently asked questions
How do I talk to an underperforming employee?
Have a private, direct conversation as soon as the pattern is clear, not after a single mistake. State the specific gap between expected and actual performance, using examples rather than generalities, then stop talking and ask what they see happening. Listen for whether they recognize the gap. Agree together on what needs to change, by when, and how you will both know it has improved. Write down what was agreed and send a short follow-up note so there is no ambiguity later.
How long should I give someone to improve?
Most performance improvement periods run 30 to 90 days, depending on the role and how complex the fix is. Thirty days works for a specific, narrow gap, like missed deadlines on a known process. Sixty to ninety days fits broader gaps, like a new manager still building core skills. Set a specific check-in date at two or three points during the period, not just one meeting at the end, so there are no surprises about whether progress is on track.
What causes underperformance?
Underperformance almost always traces to one of three causes: the person lacks the skill to do the work, they lack the will or motivation, or they lack clarity about what is actually expected. Skill gaps need training or coaching. Will gaps need an honest conversation about fit, workload, or engagement. Clarity gaps, which are far more common than managers assume, need the manager to define the expectation more specifically, since the person may be performing exactly to what they believed was asked.
When should I involve HR?
Involve HR before starting any formal improvement period or if the issue could lead to termination, since HR can confirm your documentation is sound and consistent with company policy. Also involve HR immediately if the underperformance intersects with a protected class issue, a medical or family situation, a harassment or conduct complaint, or anything with legal exposure. For a first informal conversation about a performance dip, you can usually have that conversation yourself, but loop HR in once you are building a paper trail.