You're doing performance management wrong. Here's what to do instead.
A deep dive for managers into how to go about actually assessing and improving performance challenges in your teams
Capability ≠ Performance.
Therefore, performance management plans should not revolve around capability, as they often do, but rather first look at all the enabling, empowering, and obstructive factors in an individual’s ecosystem that might be limiting their ability to perform.
Then you can ask the question, “Do we need to optimise the individual’s capability in doing what they need to do in order to improve their output and outcomes?”
What typically happens is that managers or team leaders assume that if someone isn’t performing, the issue must be a lack of capability. So they default to training, coaching, or, in some cases, performance management processes that push the individual to "improve."
But performance isn’t just about what someone can do. It’s about whether they’re in an environment that allows them to do it.
Think about elite athletes. Their raw talent matters, but their performance is shaped by coaching, recovery time, access to resources, and the culture of their team. Strip those away, and even the best struggle to deliver.
The same applies in workplaces. People operate within systems, workflows, and cultures that either support or hinder them.
So before assuming capability is the issue, the better question to ask is, what’s getting in the way of performance?
Are priorities unclear? Is leadership ineffective? Are resources limited? Is the culture toxic? Is burnout creeping in?
Most organisations get this backwards. They start with the individual, rather than the conditions around them. A smarter approach flips that. First, optimise the environment. Then, if needed, refine the individual’s capability.
In this deep dive, I’m going to unpack exactly how you can go about doing this and potentially transform how you elevate performance in your team(s).
If you want some direct help with any or all of this in your organisation, don’t hesitate to contact me directly via my website at www.devsingh.net.
So if performance issues aren’t just about capability, where should a manager start?
The key is to first audit the conditions surrounding the individual. Before questioning whether someone can do their job, you need to ask what might be making it harder for them to perform in the first place?
STEP 1: Audit the environment
Start by taking a structured, objective look at the conditions around the person who’s struggling. Here’s a breakdown of key factors to assess:
1. Clarity of expectations
Does the individual fully understand what’s expected of them, both in terms of outcomes and behaviours? Ambiguity in job roles, priorities, or success metrics creates hesitation, inconsistency, and rework.
What to check:
Are their KPIs, goals, and deliverables clearly defined?
Have they received direct, specific and regular feedback on what needs to improve?
Is there misalignment between their role and what’s actually expected on a day-to-day basis?
Are they aware of how their performance impacts the broader team or business?
Make expectations explicit. Align their work with the bigger picture, clarify priorities, and ensure they understand how success is measured. If necessary, recalibrate expectations with senior leadership to avoid conflicting demands.
2. Tools, resources, and workload feasibility
A high performer in a low-support environment will struggle. If they don’t have the tools, information, or bandwidth to execute effectively, performance will suffer regardless of capability.
What to check:
Do they have access to the right software, systems, or technology to do their job efficiently?
Are they drowning in admin work, bureaucracy, or inefficient processes?
Are they being pulled in multiple directions without focus?
Is their workload realistically achievable?
Remove friction. Streamline processes, automate redundant tasks, and ensure they’re not spread too thin. Sometimes, the fix isn’t training, it’s better delegation, re-prioritisation, or process improvement.
3. Leadership and communication dynamics
The way a person is managed can significantly impact their ability to perform. Poor leadership can create confusion, stress, and disengagement, which directly affects results.
What to check:
Are they receiving clear, constructive feedback, or is it vague and inconsistent?
Do they feel psychologically safe to ask for help, admit mistakes, or share challenges?
Is their leader approachable, or do they avoid conversations out of fear of judgment?
Does the team culture encourage collaboration, or is it siloed and competitive?
Ensure feedback is timely, specific, and actionable. Model open communication and ask, “What do you need from me to be successful?” Create space for honest discussions rather than just performance evaluations.
4. Team dynamics and external dependencies
Performance isn’t just an individual matter. A person’s ability to deliver is often tied to how well the team functions as a unit. If collaboration is broken, individual results will suffer.
What to check:
Are they dependent on colleagues who are unreliable or overloaded?
Do they experience (often hidden or invisible) bottlenecks in approvals, decision-making, or communication?
Is there an unspoken hierarchy that limits their ability to contribute effectively?
Strengthen team alignment. Address blockers in collaboration, redistribute responsibilities where necessary, and ensure cross-functional dependencies are working smoothly.
STEP 2: Optimise conditions first
Once you’ve identified the environmental factors that may be limiting performance, the next step is to make targeted improvements. Don’t try and make sweeping changes all at once. Instead, the goal is to focus on the most significant obstacles and address them in a way that has the greatest impact.
It is also important to approach this process with a constructive mindset. Instead of treating underperformance as a personal failing, consider it a signal that something in the system needs adjustment.
By shifting your focus from blame to problem-solving, you create a space where improvement feels like a shared effort rather than an individual burden.
1. Prioritise the most significant blockers
Not all environmental issues will have the same impact on performance. Some barriers are minor inconveniences, while others are fundamental obstacles that make it nearly impossible for someone to succeed.
To determine where to start, consider the following questions:
Which challenges are causing the greatest friction in daily work?
Which issues, if resolved, would create an immediate improvement in performance?
Which barriers are within your control as a manager, and which require advocacy at a higher level?
By prioritising high-impact obstacles, you ensure that your efforts lead to meaningful change rather than surface-level adjustments.
2. Align expectations and remove ambiguity
One of the most common causes of underperformance is a lack of clarity. When expectations are vague or inconsistent, employees struggle to prioritise their efforts, leading to inefficiencies, frustration, and a disconnect between effort and results.
How to improve clarity:
Ensure job responsibilities, success metrics, and performance expectations are clearly documented and communicated.
If priorities have shifted, confirm that the individual understands what is expected of them now, rather than relying on outdated assumptions.
Provide specific, actionable feedback so they know where they stand and what needs to change.
Encourage open conversations where they can ask questions and seek clarification without fear of judgment.
Once expectations are clear, employees can focus their energy on execution rather than trying to interpret what is required of them.
3. Address workload feasibility and resource gaps
Even the most capable employee will struggle if they are overloaded or do not have the tools they need to succeed. Performance is not just about effort. It is also about ensuring that the individual has the capacity to meet the demands of their role.
How to optimise workload and resources
Assess whether their workload is realistic by comparing it to others in similar roles. If they are expected to handle significantly more than their peers, performance issues may stem from unsustainable expectations rather than individual shortcomings.
Identify whether any tasks can be delegated, automated, or streamlined to reduce unnecessary burden.
Ensure they have access to the right tools, systems, and information. If outdated technology or inefficient processes are slowing them down, prioritise improvements in these areas.
Remove unnecessary administrative work that does not directly contribute to their core responsibilities.
By addressing these factors, you make it easier for the individual to focus on high-value work rather than being bogged down by inefficiencies.
4. Strengthen leadership support and communication
An individual’s performance is directly influenced by the quality of leadership and communication they receive. A supportive, engaged leader can help someone navigate challenges, while an absent or ineffective leader can leave them feeling lost and unmotivated.
How to improve leadership support
Increase the frequency of one-on-one conversations to ensure they feel heard and supported.
Provide clear, constructive feedback rather than vague or infrequent criticism.
Create an environment where they feel comfortable raising concerns or asking for help.
Be consistent in how you communicate expectations, recognition, and accountability to build trust.
When employees feel supported by leadership, they are more likely to stay engaged, take ownership of their work, and proactively address challenges.
5. Improve team dynamics and collaboration
Individual performance does not happen in isolation. If a team is dysfunctional, uncooperative, or fragmented, it can create unnecessary obstacles that prevent people from doing their best work.
How to optimise team dynamics
Identify whether poor collaboration or misalignment between team members is causing delays or frustration.
Clarify roles and responsibilities within the team to reduce confusion and duplication of effort.
Address any interpersonal conflicts or cultural issues that may be creating an unhealthy work environment.
Encourage knowledge-sharing and peer support to reduce reliance on a single individual for critical information.
By strengthening team dynamics, you create an environment where employees can work together more effectively, reducing stress and increasing overall performance.
I do want to pause at this point and explain something that might be obvious to some of you reading this - but I’ll make it explicit anyway. There are at least 2 or 3 deeper levels of “how” to even this. What I mean is, there are multiple ways you could “clarify roles and responsibilities” or “address any interpersonal conflicts”, and they will range from bad to right for your context.
This is why it can be extremely helpful to engage someone a little removed from the system to support with all of this. In larger organisations, you can sometimes get someone from HR to help, although in my experience the ability of a people partner to get into the nuance of these issues and coach managers and team leaders effectively varies a lot.
If you’re wanting to do any of this in your team or organisation and want to have a conversation about it, let me know by replying to this email or contacting me via www.devsingh.net.
6. Monitor changes and adjust as needed
Once you have started making improvements, it is important to track progress and ensure that the changes are having the intended effect. Performance does not improve overnight, and some adjustments may require further refinement.
How to monitor and refine improvements
Check in regularly to see if the changes have made a tangible difference in their ability to perform.
Be open to feedback about what is working and what still needs adjustment.
Identify any new challenges that may have emerged as a result of changes, ensuring that solutions do not create unintended problems elsewhere.
By taking an iterative approach, you ensure that the optimisations you implement are effective and sustainable over time.
Step 3: Assess individual capability (only if needed)
Okay finally, once you’ve optimised the environment and removed systemic blockers, it’s time to assess whether the individual’s capability is actually limiting their performance.
This is the stage where most managers start, but by now, you have already done the groundwork. You know that the individual has the right resources, clear expectations, a supportive leadership structure, and a functional team around them. If their performance is still not where it needs to be, it is more likely that there is a skill, experience, or behavioural gap that needs to be addressed.
So how do you determine what is missing? And more importantly, how do you support improvement in a way that is constructive rather than punitive?
1. Diagnose the specific capability gap
"Capability" is broad. To solve for it effectively, you need to break it down. Is the issue technical skills, strategic thinking, decision-making, communication, speed, or consistency?
How to assess the gap
Compare current performance against the required standard. Where are they consistently falling short? Look at specific examples rather than relying on general impressions.
Look at patterns, not one-off failures. A single mistake is not a capability issue; it is human error. Capability gaps show up as repeated struggles in the same area.
Use a mix of quantitative and qualitative feedback. If there are measurable key performance indicators, use them. If not, gather input from peers, stakeholders, and your own observations to get a full picture.
Ask the individual directly. Sometimes, they already know where they are struggling but have not felt safe to voice it. A simple question such as "Where do you feel least confident in your role?" can be revealing.
At this stage, you should be able to clearly define what is lacking. But just knowing the gap is not enough. You need to understand why it exists.
2. Determine whether it is a skill, experience, or behavioural gap
Not all capability gaps are the same. Broadly, they fall into three categories.
Skill gaps: they lack the technical or functional ability to execute effectively
This is the easiest to address because skills can be taught.
Example: A marketing analyst who struggles with data interpretation may need training in advanced analytics tools.
Solution: Provide targeted training, pair them with a more experienced colleague, or give them structured learning opportunities such as courses or hands-on projects.
Experience gaps: they have the potential but have not had enough exposure or practice
This is common in employees who are newer to a role or stepping into leadership for the first time.
Example: A newly promoted manager struggles with handling difficult conversations because they have never had to do it before.
Solution: Instead of formal training, they may need real-world experience. This could include shadowing senior leaders, receiving structured mentorship, or being given gradual opportunities to practice under guidance. Or get them a leadership coach like me!
Behavioural gaps: they technically can do the job but struggle due to mindset, habits, or emotional intelligence
This is the hardest to fix because it is not about knowledge or experience. It is about how they approach their work.
Example: A highly skilled but risk-averse product manager hesitates to make decisions, leading to bottlenecks.
Solution: This requires coaching rather than training. The focus should be on shifting their mindset through reflection, feedback, and incremental challenges that stretch their comfort zone.
By distinguishing between these three categories, you avoid misdiagnosing the problem. Sending someone to a training program will not fix an experience gap. Offering more exposure will not fix a behavioural challenge. The intervention has to match the root cause.
3. Personalise the approach based on the type of capability gap
Once you have identified the nature of the issue, the next step is to create a structured development plan.
Define clear, measurable improvements
Instead of vague goals like "improve decision-making," set concrete expectations. For example, "Within the next quarter, you will independently make three key decisions related to a specific project, present your rationale, and execute the chosen approach."
Ensure the individual knows exactly what success looks like and how it will be measured. I personally recommend having a private kanban board you both have access to. It’s likely your organisation will require you to document the development plan in some particular system or format, which is fine. Even then, I’d set up a kanban alongside that anyway for the sake of shared visual clarity that you can actually look at together when you check in.
Provide the right learning and development opportunities
Based on the type of gap, match the right intervention.
Skill gaps require formal training, technical mentoring, and practical assignments.
Experience gaps require stretch projects, secondments, and exposure to high-stakes situations.
Behavioural gaps require coaching, feedback loops, accountability partners, and reflection exercises.
Set up regular check-ins focused on progress, not just outcomes
If you only review results at the end, you risk letting someone struggle in silence. Regular check-ins and shorter feedback loops (I suggest weekly or fortnightly to begin with) allow you to adjust support as needed.
Start with open-ended questions such as "Where do you feel you are improving?" and "What has been challenging for you this week?" Ensure you can point to things on the improvement kanban as you’re working through these questions.
Offer constructive feedback using a growth-oriented approach. You might say, "I have noticed that one area is improving, but another is still inconsistent. What do you think is getting in the way?"
If progress is slow, diagnose whether the intervention itself needs adjusting. Maybe they need more hands-on support, or maybe they need more autonomy to experiment.
Important note: Just because you are the facilitator of the development or improvement plan, does not necessarily make you the best facilitator of the development or improvement. You may be facilitating the overall process, but often managers don’t actually know if it’s something is working until there is ample opportunity for the team member to deliver something that would demonstrate the improvement.
And if that opportunity happens to come by and you still need better results, don’t assume you’re the best person to advise how those results can be achieved just because you’re responsible for defining what those results need to look like.
To make this extremely clear: If I want a pizza chef to make me a very customised, personalised pizza, I can give them guidance on what I’m looking for and I can give them feedback on how their pizza turned out based on my vision. But if I didn’t like the pizza, it doesn’t mean I’m going to roll up my sleeves and start teaching them how to make better pizza. That would be utterly naïve and dumb. And there is a very solid chance that your employee - even when they are underperforming - still know how to do their job better than you (unless you literally stepped into your managerial role from their current role).
4. Phase in accountability and gradually shift ownership to them
A common mistake in performance management is swinging between extremes by either micromanaging or stepping back too soon. The goal is to transition from structured support to full ownership in a way that builds confidence rather than pressure.
Here is a phased approach.
Guided support: They work on improvement areas with your direct involvement. You give real-time feedback, check in frequently, and help them course-correct.
Coaching mode: You reduce direct oversight but stay available as a resource. Instead of telling them what to do, you ask reflective questions such as "How do you think you should approach this?" and "What would you do differently next time?"
Autonomous execution: They take full responsibility. Your check-ins shift from how they are executing to what they are learning.
By the time you reach the third stage, they should be operating at the expected level without additional intervention.
5. Know when improvement is not happening and what to do next
If, after structured support, there is still no meaningful progress, it is time for a candid discussion. At this point, you are no longer troubleshooting. You are assessing long-term fit.
Ask yourself:
Have they genuinely put in the effort to improve?
Have we exhausted the right support strategies?
Is the role aligned with their strengths, or is there a fundamental mismatch?
If the gap is insurmountable, it may be time for a role shift or an exit conversation. But if you have followed this process, you will have full confidence that you have done everything possible to set them up for success before reaching that conclusion.
Conclusion
Most performance issues are not about capability. They are about conditions. By starting with system-level fixes and only assessing capability when necessary, you create a more supportive, effective, and fair approach to performance management.
And when capability is the issue, tackling it with precision rather than vague feedback or blanket training ensures real growth. High performance is not just about hiring the right people. It is about creating the right environment, offering the right support, and knowing when to challenge and when to step back.
Done well, this approach does not just improve struggling employees. It strengthens the entire team, making performance improvement a systemic win rather than just an individual one.
If you got this far, thanks. Please tell me if this was useful, what’s missing, and what might be useful to dive deeper into more specifically.