The scenario is a well known one.   An employee is a weak performer and the company is shy about terminating them.  Perhaps there is an aggressive union presence or perhaps there is a culture where the weak performers are protected because of relationships or because the company doesn't like to terminate employees.  Whatever, the reason, rational or not, the company is very tolerant toward the selected few.  

In some companies, leaders who are faced with this dilemma may seek to place the employee in a special "holding department" where all employees who fall into this category are usually placed.  Typically, they may unproductive, they may have bad attitudes or may be hard to manage.  These employees may be approaching retirement and not putting the same effort into their work as others, they may be bitter with the company because of a bad break or they may require a whole lot of hand holding - you get the picture.

 

From a departmental point of view, this is a recipe for disaster.  Oftentimes department heads who accept an abnormal amount of poor performers end up with morale problem on their hands.  These leaders are taxed to their limits and there are productivity issues.  For instance, they may end up with two people producing the same amount of work as one productive employee...

From a leadership point of view, department heads who accept underperformers mean well but this behavior demonstrates a lack of foresight.  For instance, oftentimes, departments that take on the poor performers are background departments and over time, this can negatively impact the quality of service to the client facing departments.  This is because persons in client facing departments experience difficulties in getting what they need from the background departments and their ability to provide quality service is impeded.

So here are a few suggestions for optimal placement of underperforming employees:

1.  The first step is to create a guideline that states, "We don't transfer problem employees without understanding
      if they will add value to another department."

2.  Then assess the employee and determine whether or not they can make a valuable contribution to another
     department.  If so, identify where they can be placed and seek to place them there.   I have seen employees
     make a "360" when they are placed in the right role.  Some companies go so far as to create a role after
     weighing the risks and the business implications.

3.  If there is no appropriate role or vacancy, start disciplinary/corrective procedures.  Your company or
     organization should have policies in place that guide you through possible corrective options.  For instance,
     some companies or organizations place poor performers back on probation if the performance issues are acute
     enough.  Or the performer is provided with training or coaching for a predetermined amount of time,  which
     gives them a chance to improve their performance.  On the other hand, if you have given the poor performer all
     the chances you can, then you can consider termination among your options... 

     In cases where persons are given an opportunity to turn around their performance, give them enough time so
     that they can succeed but not so much time that it will negatively affect your team and their performance. 

4.  If you are the manager who always accepts underperforming individuals in your department, develop a healthy
     level of managerial courage.  Push back and say no when appropriate.  If you don't, you will end up with severe
     morale problems,  the productivity level within your department will suffer and you will be constantly challenged
     with an abnormal amount of people issues.  (This can be debilitating at times.)

In deciding what you will do about an underperformer, there are two points to remember:  Assess the employee's performance and determine whether or not they can contribute to the organization.  If so, create a plan and take action, if not, create a plan and take action.  Inaction can be one of the most significant adversaries of efforts to build employee morale and productivity.