Stop Rescuing Underperformers: How to Make Consequences Stick

Summary

---

Podcast Summary: No Bullsh!t Leadership with Martin G Moore

Episode 411: Stop Rescuing Underperformers – How to Make Consequences Stick
Date: July 14, 2026
Host: Martin G Moore
Guests: Leon (Cybersecurity Leader), Sharon (Director in Design & Construction)

---

Episode Overview

This episode targets a persistent leadership dilemma: dealing with underperformers and the destructive habit of “rescuing” them. Host Martin G Moore uses real-life challenges from two listeners—Leon and Sharon—to offer hands-on strategies for making accountability and consequences stick, both “upward” to difficult peers and superiors, and “downward” within your own team. The episode pushes listeners to stop absorbing the fallout from others' poor performance and to reshape team standards through bold decisions.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. The Problem with Rescuing Underperformers (03:42–08:57)

• Definition: Covering for someone who isn't delivering, whether above, beside, or beneath you in the org chart.
• Core message: Every time you swoop in and save someone who’s not doing their job, you’re telling them (and your team): “If you don’t want to do it, I’ll do it for you.”
• Quote:

  “Every time you swoop in and save someone who’s not doing their job, you’re sending a clear message: If you ever feel as though you don’t want to do your job, that’s okay. I’ll do it for you.”
  — Martin Moore (00:56)

---

2. Driving Accountability Upwards – Leon’s Story

(Leon shares at 03:42; Martin’s advice at 04:30–13:21)

• Leon’s Challenge:

  • Senior peers in adjacent business units are “untouchable” due to relationships at the top.
  • Chronic underperformance becomes everyone’s problem; “gold medalists in the corporate Teflon Olympics—nothing sticks to them.”
  • How do you drive accountability upwards, when they deflect responsibility and you lack direct authority?

• Martin’s Core Advice:

  1. Don’t Rescue Them or Their Teams:

     • Overcompensating for others' failures leads to blame if things go wrong, and peers will happily take credit if it goes right.
     • Letting underperformers “fall over” is often the only way for their lack of delivery to be seen.
     • Quote:

       “Unless you let those people fall over and be exposed for their lack of diligence… nothing will change.”
       — Martin Moore (07:37)

  2. Soft Escalation Technique:

     • Subtly inform your boss that you are encountering resistance/delays from a peer, but “ask them not to intervene.”
     • This puts the issue on the radar without escalating political tension.
     • How-to: At the end of a 1-1 with your boss, say:

       “I don’t want you to respond to this... but just so you know, I’m hitting a roadblock here and it could escalate.”
       — Martin Moore (09:28)

  3. Transparent Escalation (with the Peer Present):

     • If soft escalation fails, warn your peer that you’ll bring the issue to your boss.
     • Invite them to join the conversation so everything is above-board, which often prompts them to finally deliver.
     • Don’t escalate without their knowledge—it breeds animosity.
     • Quote:

       “Never escalate without the knowledge of the person that you’re escalating the issue about. That will kill trust—it’ll set you up a political enemy.”
       — Martin Moore (11:31)

  4. Trial and Error is Inevitable:

     • Not every situation is fixable the same way.
     • Sometimes escalation prompts change; sometimes it exposes the limits of your influence.

---

3. Enabling Within Your Own Team – Sharon’s Story

(Sharon at 13:36; Martin’s advice 14:25–24:00)

• Sharon’s Challenge:

  • Despite clear expectations and team support, her team consistently fails to communicate issues early.
  • She finds herself repeatedly stepping in to fix problems and “doing work that should be owned by someone else.”
  • Where is the line between being supportive vs. enabling?
  • Has repeated process reviews, set expectations, but still “chasing updates and doing work that isn’t mine to own.”

• Martin’s Core Advice:

  1. Course of Conduct:

     • Team members learn your habits and will game them if consequences aren’t real.
     • People don’t listen to your words, they watch your actions (“don’t watch your lips, they watch your feet”).
     • Quote:

       “They actually know you well enough now, Sharon, that they know exactly what to expect. So that’s the first thing. There’s this course of conduct... they know you’re going to act in a certain way.”
       — Martin Moore (15:00, 15:39)

  2. Consequence Deficit:

     • If people don’t face personal consequences, they’ll keep hiding issues or performing poorly.
     • Sharon admits her support means her team “knows she’ll come and sweep up behind them” (15:34).

  3. Brand and Client Damage Is Landing on the Leader:

     • Consequences of underperformance (reputational, strategic) fall on Sharon, not the responsible team members.
     • Quote:

       “They know that I will do whatever it takes to get the best outcome for the business, but they don’t have sufficient consequences to deal with their underperformance.”
       — Sharon (17:56)

  4. Why Keep the Underperformers?

     • Sharon admits—“the recruitment market is so poor right now, better the devil you know.”
     • Martin responds with a striking maxim:

       “An empty house is way better than a bad tenant.”
       — Martin Moore (19:57)

  5. The Uplift Effect:

     • Keeping a poor performer drags down the rest of the team.
     • Once they’re gone, the other team members step up and performance soars.
     • Quote:

       “It’s not that you’re getting rid of them, it’s the uplift effect it has on the rest of the team... The positive effect on every single person that’s left after the worst person goes—because they know you’re serious.”
       — Martin Moore (21:30)

  6. Messaging the Standard After an Exit:

     • After removing the underperformer, reinforce the behavioural and performance expectations.
     • Do this with dignity, but use the moment to reset the bar for what “good” looks like.
     • How-to:

       “Marty’s no longer with us... In completely unrelated news, let me restate the standard that I’m setting here and why it’s important.”
       — Martin Moore (24:08)

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On rescuing peers:

  “If it goes well, then they’ll be the first one to step in and take the credit for it. If it goes badly, they’ll say, ‘I had it all under control until Leon interfered and look what happened.’”
  — Martin Moore (07:11)

• On escalation:

  “I told my boss not to do anything. I’ve got this covered. I was just giving a status report.”
  — Martin Moore (10:34)

• On the risk of enabling:

  “People don’t watch your lips, they watch your feet.”
  — Martin Moore (15:40)

• On the chilling effect of a poor performer:

  “Your whole team performance slumps to the lowest common denominator. It’s that low watermark that makes a difference.”
  — Martin Moore (20:30)

• On making the hard call:

  “Sending a message that says, ‘I’m no longer prepared to accept this... I can’t be dragged down all the time into this stuff because I’ve got my own job to do.’”
  — Martin Moore (21:26)

---

Important Timestamps

• [03:42] Leon introduces the “untouchable peer” problem
• [04:30–08:57] Martin explains dangers of rescuing, outlines “soft escalation”
• [11:09] Martin details transparent escalation with peer present
• [13:36] Sharon presents the problem of enabling in her own team
• [14:25–17:56] Diagnosing the “course of conduct” and consequence deficit
• [19:57] The “empty house is better than a bad tenant” principle
• [21:30–25:00] Ripple effects of removing the worst performer
• [24:08] Messaging to reset team standards after an exit

---

Takeaways for Leaders

• Stop absorbing underperformance—whether from above, beside, or below.
• Let poor performers face appropriate consequences, even if it means letting a deliverable drop to expose the issue.
• Use soft escalation judiciously to inform without inflaming.
• Never escalate without transparency; bring peers into tough conversations.
• Removing chronic underperformers is critical—the benefit to team morale and standards is immense.
• Reinforce expectations immediately after action—reset the standard for what will be tolerated.

---

Final Guidance

“The best disinfectant is sunlight... Remember, an empty house is better than a bad tenant. Exit them with dignity, restate the standard, and watch what happens to those who remain. That is the hard work of leadership and it’s also the kindest thing you can do for the people who are actually trying.”
— Martin Moore (26:13)

---

Listeners are encouraged to take decisive action, make consequences meaningful, and understand that true leadership means prioritizing the standards and health of the entire team—even when that means making tough calls.

---

Transcript

[Martin Moore]

If you've ever had an idea for a business but weren't sure where to start, Shopify makes it easy to turn that idea into something real. Everything you need to start selling is there from day one, so you can focus less on the setup and more on building what you want to create. One of the biggest hurdles for any new business is getting customers all the way through the checkout. Shopify Checkout helps make that process simple, so when someone's ready to buy, they can complete their purchase quickly and easily. And when they return, their information is already saved, making repeat purchases even smoother. And once the basics are taken care of, you can spend more time growing your business. Instead of managing the technical details, Shopify gives entrepreneurs the tools they need to build, adapt, and scale as they go. With Shopify, nothing stands between your idea and a real business. So go make it one. Start your free trial at shopify.com leadership that's shopify.com leadership if you've got someone who isn't delivering and somehow you feel as though you have to keep covering for them, well, this episode is for you. Every time you swoop in and save someone who's not doing their job, you're sending a clear message. If you ever feel as though you don't want to do your job, that's okay. I. I'll do it for you. In this episode, I show you how to make the consequences of not delivering land where they should on them, not on you.

[Sharon]

Welcome to the no Bullshit Leadership Podcast. In a world where knowledge has become a commodity, this podcast is designed to give you something more access to the experience of a successful CEO who has already walked the path. So join your host, Martin Moore, who will unlock and bring to life your own leadership experiences and accelerate your journey to leadership excellence.

[Martin Moore]

Hey there, and welcome to episode 411 of the no Bullshit Leadership Podcast. This week's episode, Stop Rescuing Underperformers. How to Make Consequences Stick. I sat down with two leaders from our no Bullshit Leadership community who are living this exact problem from two completely, completely different angles. Leon was a senior leader in cyber security before he started his own business. His problem sits above him. Senior people who don't deliver, but who are protected by their relationships at the top. In Leon's words, they're gold medalists in the corporate Teflon Olympics. Nothing ever sticks to them. So how do you drive accountability upwards when you don't have the positional power? Sharon is a director in the design and construction industry. Her problem sits inside her own team. Expectations are clear and support is always there, but she's constantly being surprised by issues that haven't been raised by her team. Some of these have real impacts on the customer and possibly even extend to damaging the brand. Sharon asks the question so many of us wrestle with. At what point does being supportive turn into overcompensating for people who simply aren't doing the jobs they're being paid to do? I get really practical on both these questions. First, I explain why rescuing an underperforming peer is a disaster waiting to happen. I reveal a soft escalation technique that puts your boss in the picture without starting a political war. And I expand on one of the all time favourite expressions I picked up from one of our leadership beyond the Theory alumni. An empty house is better than a bad tenant. We're going to hear from Leon first, so let's get into it.

[Leon]

Hey Marty, I'm Leon. I'm a mid level leader in the cyber security industry and I've been in situations where someone seeing you to me is clearly not delivering. Everyone can see it, but these people are untouchable because of their relationships at the top, which is especially frustrating when you got to depend on these people to get your own job done. My question is how can you build and drive accountability upwards when the person above you is protected by politics and has become an expert at avoiding consequences? I've tried asking them directly for help on specific things and trying to get them to agree to clear accountability, but these people are really experienced at deflecting any responsibility and nothing ever sticks. They're like gold medalists in the corporate Teflon Olympics. What should I do, Marty?

[Martin Moore]

Great question, Leon. I tell you what, I can just imagine like a hundred thousand listeners frantically nodding their heads while you're going through this. It's a common thing, right? You know, I was talking this morning about the Peter Principle. The Peter Principle is getting promoted to a level of incompetence where you rest there forever because you've just gone one level above where you were at least competent and useful. And this is where a lot of people end up. Right. It's not a bad principle. So when you talk about people who are more senior, do you mean hierarchically above you in your reporting line or do you just mean people have been around for longer who are older, who are opinion leaders, who have the lay of the land and you know, a level of protected status because of their tenure?

[Leon]

Yeah, it's often not people I directly roll up to, but people in sort of adjacent business units where, you know, and as you Say, you know, sevens, High fives, high fives, high threes. Right. They seem to have stacked their team with low performers who won't take a run at them, you know, as individuals after their jobs. And everyone knows that whole business underperforms, everyone knows who the issue is. Nothing ever seems to happen about it. And that's a real challenge when you've got to rely on cross functional divisions to get your own work done. And I've seen this pattern a couple of times and as you mentioned, there's probably others who have been in similar experience. How do you do that without becoming the person who just lobs grenades at them and you know, all of a sudden those relationships they have, the friends in high places start to make your, your own tenure uncomfortable.

[Martin Moore]

Yes, Leon? Well, we've got a name for these people. They're called corporate koalas. They're a protective species and they are politically very, very well looked after. But it doesn't mean they can do the job they're being paid to do. And so from a peer level, if you're not in their direct line of control, it's very, very difficult to influence. So there's a bunch of techniques that I use which are, you know, a little bit trial and error.

[Sharon]

Ish.

[Martin Moore]

So some, some things will work really well in one situation, not in another. So let me just run through a couple of options with you. The number one thing is that you shouldn't rescue them or their team. And what I see very, very frequently is a leader who is actually really good at their job, committed to the outcomes and working feverishly to get the result. When the peer group don't deliver, or teams that aren't directly in the line of control, they try and overcompensate, they over function for them. They pick up accountabilities that should belong in the other team, they drag them into their own team. That is a disaster waiting to happen. You're on an absolute hiding to nothing if you do that. And the reason is that people will see that you're taking on their work and they'll go up, well, this is good. Like Leon's going to do my work for me. How good is this? Happy days. If it goes well, then they'll be the first one to step in and take the credit for it. If it goes badly, they'll say, well, I had it all under control until Leon interfered and look what happened. You win that one. It is just a disaster waiting to happen. The trouble is because you are diligent and corporate minded and you're trying to create value for the company and trying to get the right result, you're going to go over and above the person who's not delivering. No one ever sees that. There's no visibility of that. So unless you let those people fall over and be exposed for their lack of diligence and lack of commitment, lack of delivery, nothing will change. And they'll be telling the same story to their boss. Sometimes all these people can do is manage upwards. That's their core skill. All they do is manage up. And so they'll be managing up happily. Probably putting a few knives in your back on the way through and you're left holding hand. So that was. Have you seen that before? Have you done that before? Like where you've stepped in to try and rescue someone and it's worked out poorly?

[Leon]

Yeah. When you just want the result, you don't think about how someone could come back at you and just wreck everything. And I think as leaders who want to do the right thing, I think you often fall in that trap of well, I'm not going to crash the plane with no survivors, I'm going to try and save this. And guess what? No good deed goes unpunished.

[Martin Moore]

That's exactly right. No, you don't want to crash the plane with no survivors. However, until the failure in the delivery chain becomes obvious, nothing will ever be different. And so you'll always be under pressure, they'll always be protected and anything that goes wrong is always going to be your fault. So you've got to actually change the game and change the dynamic. If you want anything to be different with that individual who's riding on good luck and a smiling face. So that's the first thing is about what you don't do, you don't intervene. The second thing is the escalation point and this is quite tricky because knowing when to escalate, using your judgment as to when the appropriate time is to escalate and what's important enough to escalate takes a fair bit of getting used to and a fair bit of trial and error. So with the, with the escalation piece, a couple of rules, I would always use a soft escalation first. So if I'm not getting what I want, if I'm having a one on one with my boss, I just used a very soft escalation technique. So what I'll say is, and this is at the end of the meeting, like we've done all our, done all our hard business. At the end of the meeting, I'll Say, hey, look, I don't want you to respond to this. I just want to let you know what's going on. I'm currently having trouble getting Leon to deliver. Sorry, mate, had to throw you in there. I'm currently having trouble getting Leon to deliver. I don't want you to intervene like I've got this, but just so you know, I'm hitting a roadblock here and it could escalate. It could become an issue further down the track. I just want you to have that in the back of your mind. Leave it with me. I've got it covered. So what you've done is, is you've given your boss a heads up that there is an issue. You've asked your boss not to intervene. But like most bosses, they can't help themselves. They'll have to do something or say something. They'll have to take some sort of action to satisfy themselves of what's going on. And so you can expect that there might be some level of intervention, not a lot. And if anything comes back, you can say quite clearly, well, hey, hey. Sorry, Leon, but I told my boss not to do anything. I've got this covered. I was just giving a status report.

[Leon]

Yeah, yeah.

[Martin Moore]

So that's the soft escalation technique works as an interim measure. It's not going to fix the problem, but it's going to set the scene for you if you do in the future. Beyond that need to intervene and need to escalate, then there's a technique for that as well. Never escalate without the knowledge of the person that you're escalating the issue about. That will kill trust. It'll set you up a political enemy that you won't have the wherewithal to fight against because they do it for a living. You're just delivering value and they're being political animals so you can't beat them at that game. That's what. That's what they do. That's what they're good at. So the way to do this is to have a conversation with them after your. No doubt, many conversations where you've expressed the fact that they're not delivering what you need and what they've committed to. This is getting out of control. You're starting to affect our ability to deliver. And I've been as patient as I can and I've given you as much latitude as you've asked for. But I can't keep doing that forever because I'm not going to meet my deliverables. So I've got to Escalate that to my boss. Now, I get that you've got different KPIs, and you know your boss is giving you different marching orders. That's fine. Can we go and talk to my boss? Because we've got to break this deadlock, like, I think it's important enough for you to do. You don't, because you're getting a different message. Let's just get this resolved once and for all. So, number one, you've said, okay, no more Mr. Nice Guy. I'm going to escalate. Number two, you've actually invited them into that conversation so they can actually be represented there. And I reckon, I don't know, 60, maybe 70% of the time when you say that, they'll go, oh, okay, Leon. Well, mate, I'll do it for you. Just give me another week. They'll actually capitulate when they're faced with the specter of you escalating to your boss. And quite often they'll say, mate, go and do your worst. I'm not coming with you. Your problem, you sort it out. Like, sometimes you'll get that. So this is why I say there's a bit of trial and error, and sometimes it works better than others. But it's one of the few techniques that I've seen have really good effect when working with someone who is seemingly untouchable in a peer role that's not delivering what you need.

[Leon]

Love it. Marty. That's awesome. No, I wish I had that in the tool bag back when I was last dealing with that situation. But really helpful going forward. So thank you so much.

[Sharon]

I'm Sharon, a director in the design and construction industry. My frustration is outweighing my patience. Expectations in my team are clear. Support is always available, but communication is lacking. And I'm constantly finding issues rather than being told about them. And it's becoming tempting to just do the work myself. My question is, as a senior leader, how do you stop yourself from stepping in when someone isn't delivering? I know I can get the job done myself faster, but at what point does being supportive become taking responsibility for the work that isn't mine to own? I've been clear on expectations and deadlines, had critical conversations when things are off track, and stepped in when necessary to protect the outcomes. But I'm still chasing updates and doing work that should be owned by someone else.

[Martin Moore]

A very common problem, Sharon. So I'm really glad you've thrown this one on the table for us to start with. Let me just ask a couple of questions. How Long has this been going on for how long have you had the situation where you've been in that role and the people in your team have either not complied or not delivered based on your very, very clear instructions?

[Sharon]

It's probably been more evident in the last six months or so, but there's always been a little piece of it there.

[Martin Moore]

Right. And how long have these individuals who are involved in this been working underneath you?

[Sharon]

For some of them, up to three years.

[Martin Moore]

Okay. So it's not new to them. They know exactly what to expect. Right. So one of the interesting things, and this is a legal term, they call it course of conduct. So in other words, even though you might at different points ratchet up the pressure or give different messaging or whatever else, they actually know you well enough now, Sharon, that they know exactly what to expect. They can predict how you're going to react to them, and they've got a very comfortable pattern of working where they understand what their limits are and they know what consequences either will or won't turn up when they don't do their jobs. So that's the first thing. Does that twig anything with you?

[Sharon]

It does. Particularly knowing that I'll come and sweep up behind them if I need to.

[Martin Moore]

Absolutely. If ever they don't feel like doing their jobs, guess who's going to do it. Sharon's got this. She knows how to do it, she's prepared to do it, and she does it, and she gets it done the right way. So happy days. This is cruisy. We love it. So that's the first thing, is that there's this course of conduct thing where it doesn't matter what comes out of your mouth. People don't watch your lips, they watch your feet. And so they know that you're going to act in a certain way. The second thing is more around why they don't give you early warning of the things that are going wrong. And this is typically because there's no consequence for keeping things hidden. Now, if you look at cultures of companies that have really, really done badly and just blown up companies like Theranos, where they had. I did a podcast episode on this years ago, you may have heard where they had this culture of bring bad news, don't tell us what's going wrong. If you do that, you're not being loyal and you're not being supportive. We don't want to hear your negativity. So they missed the opportunity to act on things that were actually going wrong early because they had this culture of suppressing bad news. I don't know if this is at all a parallel to your culture, but what I will say is that they clearly don't have the message of how to deliver bad news and they're either afraid of the consequences of delivering it or they don't think it's important enough to deliver it on time. What do you think might be the case in your team?

[Sharon]

I feel like there's like a no care culture in regards to. I don't think there's a fear of actually raising concerns. I do think that there's probably they don't really care. I feel like they don't care about the consequences of them not meeting the expectation.

[Martin Moore]

Are the consequences not significant or severe enough for them? So do they, do they not raise things? You have a bit of a yell in the scream, metaphorically speaking. I know you wouldn't do that, but you remonstrate about what's gone wrong or why they haven't informed you of, you know, things that are going poorly and then nothing happens and you still swoop in and save them and they still get exactly the same outcome as if they had told you in advance. Is it that apathetic that they really don't feel as though there's a need to keep things on track?

[Sharon]

Yeah, I don't think the consequences are probably clear enough and the impact that it has on a business. As a business owner, they know that I will do whatever it takes to get the best outcome for the business, but they don't have sufficient consequences to deal with their underperformance or their lack of meeting the expectations.

[Martin Moore]

Right, so what consequences have you tried to put in place other than just saying that's naughty. Let me take it from here.

[Sharon]

Most of it's been around understanding, like deadlines. I mean, we've had some consequences of client damage and brand damage, which obviously has been shared very clearly. You know, process reviews and everything we do, reviewing how we do it and why we do it and the best outcomes we're trying to achieve the minimum expectations of the team, reiterated commitments that we've committed to make sure we're working at right level, all those things of reminders of all the staff constantly. But the consequences as such are just not severe enough. I guess it's probably seen more of a company wide outcome rather than an individual's contribution to that.

[Martin Moore]

Right. And when it comes to customer impacts and brand damage, who wears that most viscerally, where does that land? Who does it land on?

[Sharon]

Mostly on myself, found in strategy space.

[Martin Moore]

It lands on you and because you absorb it and your team doesn't feel that same pain as you. Once again, there's no incentive for them to change or move. So here's something interesting. I'm assuming that you have one or two at least individuals who clearly aren't doing their jobs. Like obviously aren't doing their jobs.

[Sharon]

Yes, absolutely.

[Martin Moore]

Okay, why are they still there?

[Sharon]

Because the recruitment market is so poor at the moment and it's a little piece of it's better the devil you know, because there's just nothing else out there in the market.

[Martin Moore]

This expression is not mine. Originally I heard it from one of the leaders in our leadership beyond the Theory cohort a number of years ago. But when they said it, it just hit me like a pie in the face. Sharon. An empty house is way better than a bad tenant. And if you want to put that to the test, well, you're living proof. Even if the market is really hard, what's happening when you're holding that poor performer or poor performers is they are dragging the whole team down. There is no consequences for the lack of attention to detail, for the lack of performance, for the non delivery, for the apathetic attitude. And as long as there's no consequence for that, everyone else looks at that and goes, ah, so. So that's where the performance bar is. So that I could perform at 40% of my capacity and I'm still hitting the ball out of the park next to that guy. And so your whole team performance slumps to the lowest common denominator. It's that low watermark that makes a difference. Now I can't tell you what to do. I don't know your business, I don't know your people. I just know a little bit about you from our interactions in the past, Sharon. But what I'd say is until you bite the bullet and make the decision to get rid of that worst performer or the worst couple of performers who are clearly just taking the piss. That's a technical expression. Clearly just taking the piss. Until you do that, nothing will change. I can promise you nothing will change. Because you've seen this, you've been working with them and doing everything within your power in the last little while to try and get them to improve. Nothing you try works and nothing new you try will work. So sending a message that says, I'm no longer prepared to accept this. I can't be dragged down all the time into this stuff because I've got my own job to do. I'm trying to run this business, not be doing your job. For you. And so removing quite decisively that person who's clearly the bottom of the barrel, it's not that you're getting rid of them, it's the uplift effect it has on the rest of the team, because the rest of the team looks around and they go, oh, I didn't expect that from Sharon. She's obviously thinking differently now, so I guess I'd better pull my socks up. It has a positive effect on every single person that's left after the worst person goes, because they know you're serious about meeting the demands that you have just about them doing the job they're paid to do, nothing more. Do the job you're paid to do. That's it. So does that resonate at all?

[Sharon]

It does, absolutely. I constantly say when people, people ask for more money, it's like, but you're doing the. You're doing the job you paid to do. Do that well before you talk about other things. So, yes, it does resonate and it just has to be a brave, brave decision to let some people go, knowing that the role might be vacant for a while.

[Martin Moore]

But, yeah, you'll find that, you know, and in the past, I've, I've run, you know, various campaigns like this where the whole team has been dragged down by a couple of individuals who simply don't want to play ball. And it's a shame because, you know, why do you want the rest of the team to be held back by one or two individuals who have no intention of helping you with what you're trying to do in the team? And so it's sort of almost like doing the best thing for the most people that you have under your control at the expense of troublemakers who seriously aren't going to contribute anyway, no matter if they're there or not. So the chilling effect on team culture is very easy to measure. The chilling effect on team culture. And once that person goes, the lift in performance you're going to get from the others, in my experience, will massively outweigh the loss of that set of arms and legs who was there last week. It'll massively outweigh it. So you'd be surprised that unless it's an extremely specialist area of expertise where they've been hoarding knowledge, no one else knows how to do their job. But unless that's the case, you're probably going to find an uplift in performance overall

[Sharon]

and it'll take away any ambiguity about what the expectations are for the role.

[Martin Moore]

And so when you, like, people are going to be shocked by this because it's not the way things normally work there and that's okay. But I think the way you message that's super important. Now obviously, even though this person might be just carrying on like a pork chop, playing up, not doing what they're supposed to do and just really being avoidant and disruptive, even if that's the case, it's still a person and they still got to be treated with dignity and respect, as we know. And I know you're a person who will do this, Sharon. So when you do it, you've got to give them an exit. That is kind, but it still gives you the opportunity to reinforce the messages that are important that you want the rest of the team to take out. So a technique I use for this, which is super, super useful is. Okay, let's say you decide you're going to sack Marty with the team. When you speak to the team as a whole, you say, look, Marty's no longer with us and you know, it was great to have him. He brought us to where we are now. But we need something a little bit different moving forward. So we wish Marty all the best. In completely unrelated news, let me restate the standard that I'm setting here and why it's important. And that gives you the opportunity to talk about what you want to happen with the backdrop of, of Marty just having been exited. Because the implication is Marty wasn't meeting that standard. And so how you message it afterwards and keep that pressure up and say, okay, new ball game here. I'm serious about performance. Let's get into it and let's do it together. And you'll find the people who are just waiting to say, oh, Sharon, I've. I'm so glad you've done that. Where's that?

[Leon]

Fantastic.

[Martin Moore]

Let's go. You'll find people that just come out of the woodwork to support new way of doing things because they know you're serious about performing better. Yeah.

[Sharon]

And you probably see growth in those remaining because they're prepared to push themselves harder.

[Martin Moore]

That's exactly right. You're spot on. So this is what we call the hard work of leadership. Sharon, I know you're up to it. Is there anything else I can help you with?

[Sharon]

No, I'll be happy to reduce my frustrations in this space.

[Martin Moore]

Alright, so that brings us to the end of episode 411. There you have it. Two leaders, two completely different situations, but the same underlying problem. Rescuing under performers has all sorts of unintended consequences and none of them are good. Instead of absorbing and glossing over someone's failure to perform, you've got to get it out in the open. The best disinfectant is sunlight and when someone's clearly not doing the job they should be, remember an empty house is better than a bad tenant. Exit them with dignity, restate the standard and watch what happens to the people who remain. That is the hard work of leadership and it's also the kindest thing that you can do for the people who are actually trying. If you want to go deeper on this, it's exactly the kind of thing we work through every week. Inside leadership beyond the theory. Real leaders, real situations, real answers that

help them move forward.

Head to leadershipbeyondthetheory.com to find out more. Thanks so much for joining us and I'm really looking forward to next week's episode. Even pay transparency has its problems. Until then I know you'll take every opportunity you can to be a no bullshit.

Sam.