A Challenging Meeting Right from the Start

Let’s be clear: letting people go is a very different experience from bringing new talent on board. It demands:

• Thorough discussions
• Justifications free from bias
• Group consensus

None of these aspects come easy.

The morning commenced with a routine quarterly update among the committee members, known colloquially as the "firing squad." My supervisor, Angel, was part of this group and appeared particularly solemn that day.

I reviewed the list of attendees, noting that each department was allotted 60 minutes for discussion. If there were no issues, attendance was optional—something to be grateful for.

The focus of my meeting was solely on the Sales department, which surprised me as we had the entire three-hour slot to ourselves. Angel assured us that the meeting would conclude on time.

James distributed the pre-reading material shortly after we began. We were given ten minutes to sift through a hefty document filled with names, performance evaluations, 360-degree feedback, and client insights.

We flipped through the profiles, some familiar and others shocking to me. I was the least experienced person in the room, and my face revealed my inexperience.

As I finished reviewing the file, I gave Angel and James a thumbs-up.

James took the lead. “Ladies and gentlemen, we have five profiles and two hours and forty-five minutes to finalize our decisions. Let’s get started.”

What struck me was that the criteria I thought were important didn’t hold the same weight here.

The Complexity of Evaluating Performance

Evaluating employee performance is typically straightforward. You know what to expect and how to motivate team members based on their potential for growth.

However, the process of letting employees go? That's a different story. It involves distinguishing between positive feedback and the hard truths that need to be addressed. Brutal honesty prevails, but there’s no universal set of criteria to guide us; it requires nuanced judgment.

I felt this challenge acutely when the first candidate's profile appeared on the screen.

Wade was the individual in question. I had interacted with him just twice in the past six months. He was ambitious, highly motivated, and worked diligently to secure clients. Though based in the Sydney office, my understanding of him was limited to hearsay, Salesforce data, and a couple of virtual meetings.

I had assumed he was exceptional.

Fortunately, Angel, aware of my limited experience, allowed senior managers to voice their opinions first, saving my input for last.

Wade's direct manager had to abstain from voting. I expected that Wade would be assessed on his sales performance, but to my surprise, that wasn’t the case at all.

One senior manager expressed discomfort with Wade, stating, “His sales support associate perceives him as a chauvinist and masochist. It raises concerns about his behavior if we promote him.”

This was the first piece of feedback.

Suddenly, the conversation shifted from sales metrics to interpersonal relationships and teamwork. I took notes quietly, realizing that Wade’s potential for future roles was being weighed against his conduct.

“Isn’t it obvious he would struggle as a sales senior? Everyone says he dominates conversations. I can’t envision him in a leadership role,” I noted.

The third piece of feedback was particularly striking: “I’ve spoken with him before. He interrupts constantly, and I feel belittled during our discussions. We cannot endorse such offensive behavior.”

This was serious.

It took several more opinions before I was asked to share mine. By that time, my perspective had shifted, and the voting was unanimous: 5 out of 7 members voted for Wade's release.

It was astonishing to me that, despite contributing significantly to the sales figures, Wade's other attributes overshadowed his performance during the meeting.

The Conclusion of the Meeting

After the session, James approached me, noticing my contemplative state. “Are you alright? You seem deep in thought,” he remarked. I responded with a thumbs-up.

“Shocked? Remember, results aren’t everything,” he added, prompting me to reflect on the discussions that had just unfolded. The focus had been on leadership potential, professional decorum, and team dynamics.

What I had witnessed was truly enlightening.

James seemed to read my thoughts. “It’s simple. How we present ourselves matters, across all departments. You wouldn’t want a high-performing individual who is a disruptive presence in the workplace, right?”

In that moment, clarity emerged.

James was correct. I smiled back, realizing that how we conduct ourselves—individually, in teams, and with clients—holds significant weight. The softer skills are just as important.

Today was a valuable lesson for me, and I left the meeting with a fresh perspective.

Like this narrative? Hit Subscribe!

Oh, and feel free to buy me a cup of black coffee too! Thank you!