If the employee is performing poorly because he/she is not able to perform properly (i.e. he/she does not have the ability/capacity - he/she may even be trying their best), then it is a form of incapacity and should be dealt with accordingly.  Sometimes an employee is not able to perform properly because he/she is ill (e.g. AIDS) or addicted (e.g. and alcoholic).  In all of these cases of genuine poor performance due to incapacity, the Labour Relations Act requires a different procedure from the Disciplinary Procedure - a Poor Performance or Ill Health or Injury Procedure.  These procedures still require an investigation, evidence of poor performance, a hearing and representation but, significantly, the employer is required to consider alternatives to dismissal before an employee is dismissed for incapacity. These alternatives include: adapting the job, demoting or transferring the employee or even medical boarding (in the case of ill health).

To use the “care and growth”[1] terminology; employees need to be empowered
by being given:

-         The means (e.g. tools, information, authority, support)

-         The ability (e.g. training in “how” to perform and an explanation
on “why” performance is necessary) and

-         Accountability (i.e. holding the employee accountable for a
particular standard of performance and the consequences of not performing).

In summary;

Different Scenarios

Means

v

v

X

X

Ability

X

v

v

X

Accountability

This is a situation where the employee is not performing to the required standard because he/she is unable (i.e. does not have the ability).  In this situation the “poor performance” procedure of the LRA should be followed which requires training, counselling etc. to assist the employee to acquire the ability.

If this process does not result in the employee performing at the required standard, a “no fault” dismissal may result, provided that alternatives such as demotion have been considered first, and a fair procedure has been followed.

If the employee is not performing to the required standard despite having both the means and the ability, this is likely to be a form of misconduct (e.g. negligence, insubordination, failure to follow operating instructions, sabotage etc) and the disciplinary procedure should be followed.  Depending on the severity of the misconduct, this may result in progressive discipline or dismissal.

If the employee is not performing to the required standard because of a lack of means, this is a management issue and the employee should be given the means to perform.

If the employee is not performing to the required standard due to a lack of means and ability, management should provide the means and assist the employee to acquire the ability.  If the employee is given the means and does not acquire the ability, then the “poor performance” procedure would be followed as indicated in the first scenario.

According to the leadership diagnostic, “exceptions” (i.e. incidents of poor performance) should be analysed to identify who did what to cause them and what the root causes of the exception are.  At each level of the leadership chain (from employee upwards through management), incidents should be analysed to ask:

-         Did the employee have the means?

-         Did the employee have the ability?

Employees who have both the means and the ability and yet do not perform to the required standard, should be censured (i.e. disciplined).  Employees who do not have the means but have the ability, should be provided with the means.  Employees who do not have the ability but have the means, should be helped to acquire the ability (i.e. the LRA “poor performance” procedure). Employees who have both the means and the ability and are performing to the required standard should be recognised and/or rewarded.