Employment law
Poor performance: holding the conversation and building an action plan
Friday, 5 p.m., at the Sikasso branch of Kénédougou Assurances. On the sales board, the column for Djénéba, a customer adviser, has fallen by 40% in four months. Her manager, Moussa, has prepared a sentence: "You need to pull yourself together, or there will be consequences." That sentence will solve nothing, and may even set up a dispute. Before talking about sanctions, you need to understand, then act on the right cause.
Kénédougou Assurances is a sales branch with 18 employees based in Sikasso. We will follow Djénéba, a customer adviser for four years, and Moussa, her manager. This company and the people mentioned are fictitious: their names are used for illustration only.
1. What exactly are we talking about?
Poor performance is a measurable gap between the result expected of an employee and the result they achieve. It is not a legal concept: it is a management observation. And it is a symptom, not a cause.
Behind the same gap lie three families of causes, which call for different responses:
| Cause | Question that reveals it | Appropriate response |
|---|---|---|
| Lack of competence | Does she know how? | Training, support, mentoring |
| Lack of motivation | Does she want to? | Clear objectives, recognition, consistent management |
| Obstacles | Can she do it? | Tools, organisation, information |
For the detailed diagnostic method, see Poor performance: analyse before you sanction. This article focuses on what the manager does: preparing the conversation, holding it, then building and monitoring an action plan.
The most common mistake
Attributing the gap to the person before examining obstacles and the messages sent by management. It is often the wrong lead, and the only one that leads straight to conflict.
A falling result raises a question. A sanction is not an answer.
2. Preparing the conversation: facts, not judgements
A successful conversation is prepared with dated, measurable facts. A judgement about the person closes the discussion; a fact opens it.
| Judgement to avoid | Fact to describe |
|---|---|
| "You are not making an effort any more" | "Your policy sales fell from 25 to 15 contracts a month between January and April" |
| "You are disorganised" | "Three claims files went unanswered for more than ten days in March" |
| "You are not up to it" | "The 80% renewal target has not been met since February" |
Moussa also checks three points before the conversation: was the objective written down and known to Djénéba? Was it achievable with the resources available? What has changed in the branch since January?
Example. Measuring Djénéba's gap.
January average: 25 contracts a month
February to April average: 15 contracts a month
Fall: (25 − 15) ÷ 25 = 40%
What you need to do
- Quantify the gap over a specific period, using verifiable data.
- Check that the objective was written down, known and achievable.
- List recent changes in organisation, tools and teams.
3. Holding the conversation: three open questions
A performance conversation is not a disciplinary procedure, and the Labour Code does not set its form. Its purpose is to understand. Three questions, asked without accusation, cover the three possible causes.
- "What would you need to succeed?" This question brings obstacles to light: faulty tools, late information, a decision that never comes.
- "Have you managed it before, and how?" If the employee has already met the objective, she knows how: the cause lies elsewhere.
- "What happens when you do what is expected?" This question reveals demotivating factors: efforts ignored, rules that have changed.
Djénéba explains that the new policy software crashes twice a day, that the renewal bonus was withdrawn without explanation in January, and that a new product is being sold without a clear product sheet. She met her targets last year: she knows how.
Keeping a record
Moussa writes a dated record, reviewed by Djénéba. If a termination ever had to be considered, the employer would have to prove legitimate grounds (Labour Code, article L.51). A file showing the causes investigated and the resources provided is the best proof of good faith.
What you need to do
- Ask the three open questions and listen to the answers without challenging them on the spot.
- Write a dated record of the conversation and have the employee review it.
- Identify the main cause or causes of the gap together with the employee.
4. Building the action plan
Each cause identified calls for an action, a person responsible, a deadline and an indicator. The action plan is not a sanction: it is a mutual commitment.
| Cause identified | Action | Responsible | Deadline and indicator |
|---|---|---|---|
| Faulty software | Have the supplier fix the crashes | Moussa | Within 15 days; zero crashes per week |
| New product poorly understood | Organise two days of training and provide a product sheet | Sales management | Within 1 month; sheet available |
| Demotivation after the bonus was withdrawn | Explain the decision and set a recognised quarterly target | Moussa | Monthly meeting; target of 22 contracts a month |
Training, a regulated tool
Training provided for in the contract or an amendment must state in writing its objectives, duration and pay (Labour Code, article L.9). Training leave counts as working time for paid leave and length of service, and pay is maintained (article L.11). If the training is costly, a written clause may require the employee to remain with the company for up to four years, in proportion to the cost; it is filed with the labour inspectorate (Labour Code, article L.12). See Training.
What you need to do
- Link each cause to an action, a person responsible, a deadline and an indicator.
- Put any training in writing, with its objectives and duration.
- Give the employee a copy of the action plan.
5. What the manager may not do
Under pressure for results, some reactions seem natural. They are prohibited or very risky.
| Temptation | Why it is prohibited or risky | Text |
|---|---|---|
| Imposing a fine or deducting a sum from pay | Fines are prohibited and deductions are limited to the cases provided for by the Code | L.69 and L.121 |
| Cutting fixed pay or removing a contractual bonus | Pay is a substantial term: changing it requires the employee's agreement | L.58 |
| Demoting the employee to a lower post | The job held is also a substantial term | L.58 |
| Sidelining the employee because of pregnancy, disability or sex | Prohibited discrimination | L.4 |
The employer may not impose fines, and no deduction may be made from pay other than those provided for by the Code (Labour Code, article L.121). A breach of this rule is punishable by a fine of XOF 10,000 to 18,000, and XOF 20,000 to 50,000 for a repeat offence (article L.321).
Any change to pay, working conditions or the job held must be proposed to the employee, who may refuse it (Labour Code, article L.58). If the renewal bonus withdrawn in January was in Djénéba's contract, withdrawing it without her agreement was already an irregular change: Kénédougou Assurances must put it right.
The action plan is negotiated. Pay is not withheld.
What you need to do
- Rule out any deduction from pay linked to results.
- Propose any change to pay or post in writing, and wait for the employee's answer.
- Check that no decision is linked to a discriminatory criterion.
6. Monitoring, reassessing, and knowing when the law takes over
Moussa sets a monthly review for three months. At each meeting, he compares the planned indicator with the actual result and records what has been done.
Example. Monitoring Djénéba's sales after the action plan.
May: 18 contracts
June: 21 contracts
July: 24 contracts, above the target of 22
Had the gap persisted despite the resources provided, two routes would have opened up. The first is dismissal for poor performance, which is not misconduct and requires proof of legitimate grounds (L.51): see Dismissal on grounds of poor performance. The second is mutually agreed termination, negotiated by mutual agreement, with a payment at least equal to statutory severance pay (Labour Code, article L.50 bis).
What you need to do
- Set the dates of the review meetings from the outset.
- Record the indicator, the result and the actions completed at each review.
- Only consider legal steps after providing all the resources set out in the plan.
Key takeaways in 6 points
- Treat poor performance as a symptom and look for its cause before looking for someone to blame.
- Prepare the conversation with dated, quantified facts, never with judgements about the person.
- Ask three open questions: what is missing to succeed, whether she has managed it before, what happens when she does well.
- Build a written action plan, with an action, a person responsible, a deadline and an indicator for each cause.
- Never impose fines or deductions, and never change pay or post without the employee's agreement.
- Monitor the plan every month and keep a written record of every step.