This would have to be the most emotionally evocative subject that #nzlead has tacked so far. I’m just going to put it out there: redundancy is used as a way to exit poor performers. There, I’ve said it, it does happen. But there are two schools of thought around this.
First, it can be the most humane option. There is an obligation for employers to recognize they hired the wrong person for the job and the company. No one comes to work to perform poorly. Also, dealing with poor performance can be protracted and painful for both parties. At least a redundancy keeps some dignity. It’s not about them personally, it’s about their role. Whether that is the right thing to do or not.
On the other hand, it is also a cop out. Managers are not managing their staff as they should be and employees are not given the right feedback at the right time so they can rectify their performance. Whose fault then is it if someone is not performing? In fact, you can be rewarding crap performance.
This debate raises more questions. Are we following a process that is appropriate to the circumstances? Maybe? Maybe not? Who makes the decision? Either way, HR is seen as the instigators of what can be a brutal process – whether it’s performance management or redundancy.
Dignified and supportive HR people who communicate a transparent message make a difference for people going through redundancy. To look after the HR people involved, we need a trusted network to provide coaching and support, share experiences, ideas, vent to, and provide lots of chocolate and wine! Group hug anyone?
We look forward to continuing the supportive journey with you.
Tash & Amanda
nzlead.wordpress.com 
Pingback: #NZLEAD PREVIEW: Why is Performance Management so HARD?? |