Low-performance management process

The outcome

The outcome of the low-performance management process is a repeatable path through this question: How should expectations, evidence, coaching, support, decisions, and documentation progress over time? The working view makes expectation gap, evidence, and conversation visible so discussion can move from general opinion to a specific action or decision.

When to run it

Run the low-performance management process when work in feedback and performance repeatedly crosses the same stages or handoffs and variation is causing delay, rework, or unclear ownership. Focus the first version on expectation gap, evidence, and conversation rather than documenting every possible exception.

How the process works

The low-performance management process is a controlled sequence with explicit entry conditions, stages, handoffs, outputs, and exit criteria. Its core working elements are expectation gap, evidence, conversation, and support. Those elements belong together because each changes how the others should be interpreted or acted on.

Process stages

1. Expectation gap

Capture expectation gap only at the level needed to answer: How should expectations, evidence, coaching, support, decisions, and documentation progress over time? Use observable evidence, name any unresolved judgment, and state what action or choice this entry can change. Within the low-performance management process, connect this entry to evidence so the relationship can be reviewed rather than inferred.

2. Evidence

Name the evidence, its date and owner, and any limitation that affects how confidently it can be used. Within the low-performance management process, connect this entry to conversation so the relationship can be reviewed rather than inferred.

3. Conversation

Capture conversation only at the level needed to answer: How should expectations, evidence, coaching, support, decisions, and documentation progress over time? Use observable evidence, name any unresolved judgment, and state what action or choice this entry can change. Within the low-performance management process, connect this entry to support so the relationship can be reviewed rather than inferred.

4. Support

Capture support only at the level needed to answer: How should expectations, evidence, coaching, support, decisions, and documentation progress over time? Use observable evidence, name any unresolved judgment, and state what action or choice this entry can change. Within the low-performance management process, connect this entry to checkpoints so the relationship can be reviewed rather than inferred.

5. Checkpoints

Capture checkpoints only at the level needed to answer: How should expectations, evidence, coaching, support, decisions, and documentation progress over time? Use observable evidence, name any unresolved judgment, and state what action or choice this entry can change. Within the low-performance management process, connect this entry to improvement so the relationship can be reviewed rather than inferred.

6. Improvement

Capture improvement only at the level needed to answer: How should expectations, evidence, coaching, support, decisions, and documentation progress over time? Use observable evidence, name any unresolved judgment, and state what action or choice this entry can change. Within the low-performance management process, connect this entry to decision paths so the relationship can be reviewed rather than inferred.

7. Decision paths

Name the decision, the person or body with final authority, the date, and the rationale that should remain visible later. Within the low-performance management process, connect this entry to records so the relationship can be reviewed rather than inferred.

8. Records

Capture records only at the level needed to answer: How should expectations, evidence, coaching, support, decisions, and documentation progress over time? Use observable evidence, name any unresolved judgment, and state what action or choice this entry can change. Within the low-performance management process, connect this entry to decision paths so the relationship can be reviewed rather than inferred.