Exiting an Employee

To be a leader or a manager of a team may not be an easy task, but it can be very rewarding to develop, train, mentor, and coach a team to achieve and surpass their targets. However, there are aspects of leadership that can be very stressful, such as when you are forced to place all your team in a 'normal bell curve'. In some companies, HR asks managers to distribute the appraisals of the professional under their supervision in a 'normal bell curve' where the left side is the employees not performing, those in the middle are reaching the target, and the right surpassing the target. The issue comes when a team is performing consistently, and no one should be on the left-hand side and HR forces the curve. Such conversations are difficult.

If the employee is not delivering, placing them on the left-hand side is not an issue. How to rank someone who is delivering on their objectives as not delivering? This is not an easy conversation. Luckily, in most of the cases, HR can reach a compromise. For example, let's say that you have ten employees under you. The rating table of your company defines their rating according to the level of achievement:

Out of your ten subordinates:

• A is a '5' rating;
• B and F are '4';
• D, G, H, and I are '3';
• C and E are '2';
• J is a '1' rating.

Here, you have an almost perfect bell curve.

Where you have no '4s' and '5s', how would you build a normal bell curve? You can't.

Unfortunately, in some companies, HR departments force a 'normal bell curve', and that is mainly driven by easy or wrongly set targets. They are trying to prevent paternalism or easy targeting practices. Again, follow this module when setting targets, to make them challenging but achievable, and follow the five principles:

• Clear;
• Measurable;
• Achievable;
• Relevant;
• Time-based.

Following these principles, you will never be forced to normalise your team performance as you have the arguments and results to prove that moving a '3' to a '4' or '5' will be an unfair move that could be questioned, with no chance to defend it.

However, when appraising your team, you may reach the conclusion that an employee is not performing or behaving as expected by the company. This conclusion must trigger a plan to either improve the employee's performance or you may need to terminate their employment.

It is seldom an exit exercise is immediate, and only in extreme cases of misconduct. Normally it is a process that takes months. You can also have termination processes because of external issues affecting your bank performance, such as a financial crisis, or a big loss in credit portfolio, that forces the company to reduce staff. Or, when in a global bank, a decision is made to exit a geography. Other than that, the exiting process is a process that takes time, where the employee involved is advised of their performance and/or behaviour, and improvement plans are followed, sometimes with success, sometimes not.

To exit an employee can be the biggest challenge to many managers and supervisors, and more so when there isn't a performance or behaviour issue involved. Such processes need to be done very carefully, as a difficult situation can turn into a real issue. Even when a bank is facing a difficult time, such processes aren't easy or without challenges. Yes, you have the excuse of the 'issue' triggering the termination, but the employee will always ask, "Why me?".

Sometimes, because of external factors, a bank may be forced to exit a group of employees. In any circumstance, the way to proceed must be with the highest level of professionalism and respect to the employees involved.