Helping Them Grow... or Letting Them Go?

When to coach, when to correct, and how to document

A manager's guide to performance improvement and progressive discipline in federal service

So you've got a performance problem. Maybe it's chronic lateness, maybe it's missed deadlines, or maybe someone just isn't cutting it despite your best efforts to help them succeed.

Here's where most federal managers freeze up and then try to work around having to deal with either process. I see managers confuse these two things all the time. Neither are fun to deal with, and many supervisors will bend over backwards to avoid addressing either one.

But here's the reality: These are two separate issues governed by different parts of federal law. Title 5 of the U.S. Code gives us two distinct approaches:

Chapter 75 (Progressive Discipline): For conduct issues and misconduct
Chapter 43 (Performance Improvement): For performance deficiencies and inability to do the job

Yes, at times they can intertwine and become the same problem, but they require fundamentally different strategies. From a servant leadership perspective, both processes are ultimately about helping people succeed. We're not looking to jam people up. We're trying to turn each scenario around and help employees become successful.

But here's the brutal reality: When you avoid these processes and let problems fester, the cost is astronomical. We used to joke. How many GS-12 HR Specialists, GS-13 and GS-14 supervisors does it take to fix one employee? How many man-hours, how much taxpayer money gets wasted when something that could have been addressed early has gotten completely out of hand? Think about it from 30,000 feet: the wasted time, resources, and money to go through an entire progressive process because a manager was too uncomfortable to address the issue early.

Get it right from the start, and you have a clear roadmap to either help the employee succeed or, if that's not possible, move them out efficiently and fairly. This isn't about being harsh. It's about being an effective steward of public resources and helping people reach their potential.

Your Performance Management Roadmap

Everything you need to address performance and conduct issues the right way.

The Critical Difference: Discipline vs Performance

Before you can fix a problem, you have to understand what kind of problem you're dealing with. This fundamental distinction shapes everything that comes after.

Progressive Discipline (Chapter 75)

What it is:

Addresses misconduct, rule violations, and willful behavior problems

Legal authority:

5 CFR Part 752 - actions taken "for such cause as will promote the efficiency of the service"

When to use:

Employee knows what to do but chooses not to do it
Clear policy violations (attendance, conduct, security)
Willful disobedience or insubordination
Inappropriate behavior or ethical violations

The goal:

Correct behavior through consequences

Performance Improvement (Chapter 43)

What it is:

Addresses inability to meet job requirements and performance standards

Legal authority:

5 CFR Part 432 - performance-based reductions in grade and removal for "unacceptable performance"

When to use:

Employee tries but can't meet standards
Lacks skills, knowledge, or abilities
Work quality or quantity is insufficient
Good intent but poor execution

The goal:

Improve capability through support and training

The Servant Leadership Approach

Can't do it vs. Won't do it, but with a heart to help

Can't do it: Performance improvement. They need our support, training, clearer expectations, or different tools. As servant leaders, we "put the needs of the employees first and help people develop and perform as highly as possible."

Won't do it: Progressive discipline. They know what's expected but choose not to comply. Even here, our goal is correction and growth, not punishment.

Sometimes it's both: An employee might start with a performance issue that becomes a discipline issue if they refuse to improve or accept help. Our job is to give them every reasonable opportunity to succeed.

The Servant Leadership Reality Check

Management isn't for the weak. Being a steward that focuses his management style on servantship doesn't mean you are soft. The shepherd still has to use the hook now and again.

Here's what servant leadership actually means: You serve the mission, you serve the taxpayers, you serve your good employees, and yes, you serve the problem employee by giving them every reasonable chance to succeed. But when they choose not to take those chances, servant leadership means protecting everyone else.

The shepherd analogy is perfect: A good shepherd protects the flock. Sometimes that means gently guiding a wandering sheep back to safety. Other times it means using the staff to fend off wolves. The shepherd who lets wolves attack the flock because he's "too nice" to fight isn't a servant leader. He's a failure.

Federal management requires backbone:

You're a steward of taxpayer resources. Letting one person's poor performance waste government money isn't kindness, it's negligence
You're responsible for mission success. Avoiding difficult decisions because they're uncomfortable is abandoning your duty
You owe your good employees protection. Letting them carry dead weight while you avoid confrontation is betraying their trust
You serve the problem employee best by giving them clear expectations, genuine support, and real consequences when they choose not to improve

The difference between servant leadership and being a pushover: Servant leaders make hard decisions for the right reasons. Pushovers avoid hard decisions for comfortable reasons. One serves others, the other serves only themselves.

Bottom line: True servant leadership sometimes requires you to be the bad guy in someone's story so you can be the hero in everyone else's. That's not weakness. That's strength with purpose.

The Servant Leader's Question

"Do those served grow as persons? Do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous?" This applies even in difficult performance situations, and sometimes the answer is that they need to grow elsewhere.

A good shepherd protects the flock, sometimes by making hard decisions about wolves in sheep's clothing.

Decision Framework: Which Path to Take

When you're facing a problem employee, work through this decision tree to determine your approach.

Step-by-Step Decision Process

Step 1: Is there a clear policy, rule, or standard that was violated?

YES → Did the employee know about this rule/standard?

YES → Progressive Discipline (they chose to violate known rules)
NO → Performance Improvement (clarify expectations first)

NO → Is this about work quality, quantity, or technical ability?

YES → Performance Improvement (they need help improving)
NO → Look deeper. Might be a conduct issue disguised as performance

CRITICAL: Performance Standards Must Be In Place

This is where having clear performance standards is absolutely essential. I have seen the whole process stop dead, even when the employee is completely wrong, because they slipped through the cracks and performance standards weren't properly established.

What happens: You know they're not doing the job, everyone knows it, but when HR reviews the case, there's no documented performance standard that clearly defines what "acceptable" looks like for that specific duty.

The legal reality: You can't hold someone accountable for failing to meet a standard that was never clearly communicated or documented. Even obvious failures become hard to address without clear benchmarks.

Prevention: Ensure every employee has current, specific performance standards (EPAP) that clearly define what success looks like. Don't wait until there's a problem to realize your standards are vague or outdated.

Progressive Discipline: When Rules Are Broken

Progressive discipline is exactly what it sounds like: a series of increasingly serious consequences designed to correct misconduct before it leads to removal. But here's what many managers don't understand: OPM regulations at 5 CFR 752.202(c) make clear that "an agency is not required to use progressive discipline."

That means you can skip steps for serious offenses. You don't always have to start with a warning for theft, violence, or major safety violations.

Who Is ER/LR? Most Managers Don't Even Know They Exist

Employee Relations/Labor Relations (ER/LR) Specialists are the specialized HR professionals who handle discipline, performance issues, grievances, and union matters. They're not the same people who handle hiring, benefits, or general HR questions.

What most managers don't realize: There's an entire section of HR dedicated specifically to helping you handle problem employees properly and legally. You're not supposed to figure this out on your own.

The full team involved in disciplinary cases:

Manager (Proposing Official): You, the supervisor proposing the disciplinary action
ER/LR Specialist: Guides the process, drafts documents, ensures legal compliance
Labor Attorney: Reviews documents for legal sufficiency before finalization
Second-line Supervisor (Reviewing Official): Higher-level manager who reviews and approves the action
Deciding Official: The supervisor above who makes the final determination (may be the same as reviewing official depending on agency structure)

How to find them: In larger agencies, they might be called Employee Relations, Labor Relations, or Employee/Labor Relations. In smaller offices, it might be one person wearing multiple hats. Ask your HR office "Who handles progressive discipline and performance improvement cases?"

This is where having a good working relationship with your Employee Relations/Labor Relations (ER/LR) Specialist is critical. They can and will help walk you through this process, but try not to make a critical scenario be the first time you talk with them.

What ER/LR brings to the table:

Table of penalties: They can give you the agency's penalty matrix and help you understand where you are in the process
Employee history: They have access to any other incidents this employee has been involved with across the agency
Pattern recognition: Is this their 3rd incident for the same issue with 3 different managers? That will play into where you are on the table of penalties
Legal network: They usually have better working relationships with your agency's labor attorneys and can get them brought in quickly if needed
Faster legal guidance: They can bounce questions off those legal counselors and get responses much faster than some random supervisor emailing them
Full case development and document process: Before ER/LR drafts anything, you've usually had many phone calls where you give them all the documentation they need to help put the case together. They'll review it, check the table of penalties, review past agency handling of similar situations (because you can't veer too far from what's been issued in the past for similar cases), and you discuss options together. They'll also incorporate the relevant Douglas factors into the disciplinary letter. Then they write the letter and send it to you for review. You send it back as good or with corrections. They get it legal reviewed, then it comes back to you ready for final signature and delivery. A copy goes back to ER/LR for the file.
Process expertise: They know what will and won't hold up in a grievance or appeal

Proactive relationship building:

Call them up and get to know them personally
Ask them how they would like to be brought in on processes
Bounce scenarios off them before they become real problems
Learn their preferences for documentation and communication
Understand your agency's specific procedures and quirks

From my experience: I used to call them all the time. They were actually great to work with once we established that relationship. They appreciate managers who want to do things right rather than those who only call when they're in crisis mode.

Why this matters: When you do have a real issue, they'll already know your management style, trust your judgment, and be more likely to give you the benefit of the doubt. Plus, they can steer you away from rookie mistakes before you make them, and they might tell you this employee has a pattern you didn't know about.

The Progressive Discipline Steps: Your Roadmap

Here are the standard federal progressive discipline steps. Remember, you're not required to follow this exact sequence. You can skip steps for serious offenses, but this gives you the framework.

Step 1: Verbal Counseling/Warning

When to use: First-time minor misconduct, policy violations, or when you want to give someone the benefit of the doubt.

What it is: An informal conversation that makes clear the behavior is unacceptable and must stop.

Key elements:

Clear description of the misconduct or policy violation
Reference to the specific rule or policy that was violated
Statement that the behavior must stop immediately
Explanation of potential consequences if it continues
Employee acknowledgment that they understand

Critical: Document it immediately with a follow-up email or memo to file. "Per our conversation today regarding [specific incident], I want to confirm..."

Step 2: Written Counseling/Warning

When to use: Second occurrence of similar misconduct, or when verbal counseling didn't work.

What it is: A formal written document that goes in the employee's personnel file.

Key components:

Specific description of the current incident
Reference to previous verbal counseling (if applicable)
Clear statement of expectations going forward
Warning that future violations may result in more serious discipline
Employee acknowledgment section

Legal weight: This establishes a pattern and shows you're taking progressive steps.

Step 3: Written Reprimand

When to use: Continued misconduct after previous counseling, or more serious single incidents.

What it is: A formal disciplinary action that stays in the employee's Official Personnel Folder (OPF).

Process requirements:

Employee gets advance written notice (typically 15 days)
Right to respond orally and/or in writing
Right to union representation
Consideration of employee's response before finalizing
Final decision letter explaining the discipline

Appeal rights: Employee can grieve through union or file EEO complaint if applicable.

Step 4: Suspension (1-14 days)

When to use: Serious misconduct or repeated violations after previous discipline.

What it is: Employee is removed from duty and loses pay for the suspension period.

Process requirements:

Advance written notice (typically 30 days)
Right to respond and have representation
Consideration of Douglas factors
Opportunity to review materials relied upon
Final decision with specific effective dates

Important: Suspension decisions require careful documentation and ER/LR involvement.

Step 5: Removal/Termination

When to use: Severe misconduct or continued violations despite previous progressive discipline.

What it is: Employee is terminated from federal service.

Process requirements:

Advance written notice (typically 30 days)
Full due process rights
Extensive documentation of progressive steps taken
Legal review and upper management approval
Clear articulation of Douglas factors

Appeal rights: Employee can appeal to Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB).

When You Can Skip Steps

Remember: Progressive discipline is a guideline, not a requirement. You can skip steps for:

Violence or threats: Can go straight to suspension or removal
Theft or fraud: Serious enough to warrant immediate severe discipline
Safety violations: When someone could be hurt
Criminal conduct: On or off duty that affects job performance
Sexual harassment: Depending on severity
Gross insubordination: Refusing direct orders

Key principle: The penalty should fit the offense. Your agency's table of penalties and past practice will guide these decisions.

Always consult ER/LR before skipping steps to ensure your reasoning is sound and legally defensible.

Common Progressive Discipline Mistakes

Inconsistent application: Giving different employees different penalties for the same offense without good reason.

Mixing performance and conduct: Trying to use progressive discipline for performance issues that should be handled under Chapter 43.

Poor timing: Waiting months to address misconduct, or rushing through steps without giving them time to work.

Inadequate documentation: Not clearly linking current discipline to previous steps in the progressive process.

Skipping due process: Not giving proper notice or opportunity to respond for formal disciplinary actions.

Personal feelings: Letting your personal relationship (good or bad) with the employee affect the discipline decision.

Understanding Douglas Factors: The Foundation of Federal Discipline

What they are: The Douglas factors come from a 1981 Merit Systems Protection Board case (Douglas v. U.S. Department of Veterans Administration) that established 12 key factors federal managers must consider when determining appropriate discipline.

Simple definition: Think of Douglas factors as a legal checklist that ensures disciplinary actions are fair, reasonable, and defensible. They're the "show your work" part of federal discipline, proving you considered all the relevant circumstances before deciding on a penalty.

Why they matter: The Douglas factors provide "an adequate and useful template for arriving at reasonable penalty determinations" and give agencies "the best chance of successfully defending" their disciplinary decisions if challenged.

How ER/LR uses them: When your ER/LR specialist drafts your disciplinary letter, they incorporate the relevant Douglas factors to show the penalty is reasonable and legally defensible. They know which factors apply to your specific case and how to articulate them properly.

▼ Click to see all 12 Douglas Factors

The nature and seriousness of the offense and its relation to the employee's duties
The employee's job level and type of employment
The employee's past disciplinary record
The employee's past work record, including length of service
The effect of the offense upon the employee's ability to perform duties and upon supervisors' confidence in the employee
Consistency of the penalty with those imposed upon other employees for the same or similar offenses
Consistency of the penalty with any applicable agency table of penalties
The notoriety of the offense or its impact upon the reputation of the agency
The clarity with which the employee was on notice that the conduct was prohibited
The potential for the employee's rehabilitation
Mitigating circumstances surrounding the offense
The adequacy of alternative sanctions to deter the employee and others from similar conduct

Your role: You don't need to become a Douglas factors expert. That's why you work with ER/LR. But understanding that they exist helps you provide better information during case development and shows why the collaborative process produces stronger, more defensible decisions.

Additional resources: For the complete legal text, see the original Douglas v. VA decision (PDF) or OPM's guidance on discipline and adverse actions.

Progressive Discipline: We're All In This Together

Here's what's really happening during progressive discipline: You've got an entire team of professionals working together to give this employee every reasonable opportunity to course-correct. This isn't about punishment. It's about providing that wake-up call that helps people succeed.

All the moving parts working for the employee:

You (the manager): Providing clear expectations, feedback, and support
ER/LR specialist: Ensuring the process is fair and legally sound
Legal review: Protecting both the employee's rights and the agency's mission
Higher-level oversight: Making sure the penalty fits the offense
The progressive structure itself: Multiple chances to improve before serious consequences

The servant leadership reality: Sometimes the most caring thing you can do is help someone realize this role isn't the right fit for them. Maybe they find a position better suited to their strengths elsewhere in government, or maybe they discover their calling is in the private sector.

Either way, you've given them:

Clear feedback about expectations
Fair warning about consequences
Multiple opportunities to succeed
A legally sound, defensible process
The dignity of knowing exactly where they stand

That's servant leadership in action. Helping people grow, even when that growth means finding a better fit elsewhere. You're serving the employee, your team, your mission, and the taxpayers all at the same time.

Performance Improvement: When Skills Fall Short

Performance improvement is about helping employees succeed, not punishing them for failure. But it's also about protecting the mission when someone can't do the job. Under 5 CFR Part 432, agencies must provide employees with "a reasonable opportunity to demonstrate acceptable performance" and "offer assistance to the employee in improving unacceptable performance."

This isn't just good management. It's a legal requirement before you can take adverse action for performance.

The Performance Improvement Process: Step by Step

Stage 1: Verbal Coaching/Counseling

When to use: First sign of performance issues, minor problems, or when you're not sure if it's a pattern yet.

What it is: An informal conversation focused on helping the employee understand expectations and succeed.

Key elements:

Clear description of the performance gap
Specific examples of what needs to improve
Your commitment to help them succeed
Timeline for improvement (usually 30-60 days)
Offer of training, resources, or support

Document it: Send a follow-up email summarizing the conversation. "Per our discussion today about [specific issue], I wanted to confirm our plan moving forward..."

Stage 2: Written Coaching/Counseling

When to use: Performance hasn't improved after verbal coaching, or the issue is more serious but not yet at PIP level.

What it is: A formal written document that clearly outlines performance deficiencies and expectations.

Key components:

Specific performance standards that aren't being met
Clear, measurable expectations going forward
Training or assistance you'll provide
Timeline for improvement (typically 60-90 days)
Statement that failure to improve may lead to further action

Legal protection: This document shows you tried to help before moving to a PIP.

Stage 3: Performance Improvement Plan (PIP)

When to use: Performance remains unacceptable despite previous coaching, or the deficiency is severe enough to warrant immediate PIP.

Legal authority: 5 CFR Part 432 - this is the formal process that can lead to demotion or removal.

Minimum duration: 90 days for most positions (some agencies require 120 days)

PIP Construction: What Goes In and What Stays Out

✓ DO Include in Your PIP

Specific performance standards with measurable criteria
Concrete examples of current deficient performance
Clear expectations for what acceptable performance looks like
Training and assistance you'll provide
Regular check-in schedule (weekly or bi-weekly meetings)
Specific deadlines and milestones
Consequences if performance doesn't improve
Employee acknowledgment section

✗ DON'T Include in Your PIP

Vague language like "improve attitude" or "be more professional"
Conduct issues - those belong in progressive discipline
Unrealistic expectations that set them up to fail
Personal opinions about the employee's character
Comparison to other employees
Issues not related to job performance
Requirements that weren't previously communicated
Subjective measures without clear criteria

PIP Example: The Right Way

WRONG: "Employee must improve communication skills and be more responsive to customer needs."

RIGHT: "Employee must respond to all customer inquiries within 24 hours during business days. Response must include either a complete answer or a status update with expected resolution date. Customer satisfaction ratings must average 3.5 or higher on 5-point scale based on monthly surveys."

Why it works: Specific, measurable, achievable, and directly tied to job duties.

During the PIP: Managing the Process

Your Role During the PIP: Servant Leader as Coach

Weekly check-ins: Schedule regular meetings to review progress, provide feedback, and offer support. Document these meetings.

Provide promised assistance: If you said you'd provide training or resources, deliver on that commitment. The employee's success is your success.

Document everything: Keep detailed records of meetings, assistance provided, progress made, and any setbacks.

Be fair but realistic: You're trying to help them succeed, but you're also protecting the mission. Don't lower standards, but do provide genuine support.

Stay objective: Focus on performance and behaviors, not personality or attitude.

Communicate regularly with HR: Keep your ER/LR specialist in the loop, especially if issues arise.

Red Flags During PIP Implementation

Employee refuses training or assistance: Document this carefully. It may become a conduct issue.

Performance gets worse: This might indicate the employee has given up or is being defiant.

New performance issues emerge: Stick to the PIP scope. Don't add new requirements mid-stream.

Employee claims discrimination or harassment: Immediately involve HR and possibly legal counsel.

You're not providing promised support: If you can't deliver what you promised, modify the PIP formally. Don't just ignore it.

PIP Outcomes: What Happens Next

Successful PIP

Employee meets all PIP requirements

Remove from PIP status
Continue normal supervision
Document the successful completion
Monitor performance going forward
Consider what support helped them succeed

Important: They're not "on probation" forever. Once they succeed, treat them like any other employee, but stay vigilant.

Failed PIP

Employee doesn't meet PIP requirements

Initiate removal or demotion action
Work with ER/LR to draft proposal
Provide all PIP documentation
Follow agency adverse action procedures
Employee gets appeal rights

Reality check: This is the point where servant leadership means protecting the mission and other employees.

The Partial Success Scenario

What if they improve but don't fully meet all PIP requirements?

This is where management judgment comes in. You have several options:

Extend the PIP: If significant progress was made but more time is needed
Modify expectations: If original requirements proved unrealistic
Proceed with action: If improvement is insufficient for the job requirements
Consider reassignment: If they show ability but in different areas

Key principle: Be consistent with how you've handled similar situations before. Consult with ER/LR and document your reasoning clearly.

Special PIP Considerations

When Performance and Conduct Overlap

The gray area: Sometimes an employee's performance issues stem from conduct problems, or conduct issues mask performance deficiencies.

Examples of overlap:

Chronic absences affecting work quality (attendance conduct + performance impact)
Refusing training that's needed for performance improvement
Disruptive behavior that interferes with team performance
Insubordination when given performance feedback

How to handle it: Work with ER/LR to determine the primary issue. You might need to address conduct first before performance improvement can be effective, or run concurrent processes.

The servant leadership approach: Address the whole person and situation, but don't let conduct issues derail performance improvement efforts.

Performance Improvement Success Stories

What makes PIPs successful:

Clear expectations that the employee understands
Genuine support from management
Realistic timelines that allow for actual improvement
Regular feedback so they know how they're doing
Focus on job performance, not personality
Employee buy-in and willingness to improve

From my experience: The employees who succeed on PIPs are usually the ones who didn't realize how far off track they were. Once they understand the expectations and get the support they need, they often become strong performers.

The servant leadership win: When you help someone succeed who was failing, you've served the employee, the mission, and the taxpayers. That's what good management looks like.

Documentation That Holds Up

Whether you're pursuing discipline or performance improvement, your documentation will make or break your case. Here's how to document like a pro.

The Performance Rating Reality Check

Listen carefully: If you have not addressed performance or conduct issues throughout the rating period, and have given them clear goals to achieve or standards to adhere to, don't think you can put ANY of it on their performance rating, nor use it as weight to rate them.

The hard truth: Documentation of you trying to get them to improve and succeed has to be shown in order for it to affect their rating. Don't think you can hold it all until EPAP time and then unload both barrels. Will not happen.

Who will stop you:

HR will not allow it
A good reviewing official will reject it
The employee will have grounds for a successful grievance
You'll look like you're ambushing someone instead of managing them

What this means: If you haven't been documenting issues and working with the employee throughout the year, you can't suddenly rate them poorly at annual review time. The performance rating must reflect what you actually managed during the rating period, not what you wished you had addressed.

The servant leadership principle: Ongoing feedback and support isn't just good management. It's required for fair evaluation. You can't help someone succeed if you never tell them they're failing.

Common Mistakes That Kill Your Case

Most federal managers would rather reorganize their entire office than deal with a performance or conduct problem. I get it. These processes are intimidating, time-consuming, and nobody wants to be "that manager." But avoiding the problem doesn't make it go away.

The Cost of Avoidance: Think 30,000 Feet

What most managers do: Hope the problem employee transfers, retires, or magically improves on their own. Meanwhile, they:

Assign the hard work to other team members
Work around the problem employee
Give inflated performance ratings to avoid confrontation
Ignore policy violations because "it's too much paperwork"
Wait until the problem becomes unbearable

The real cost in taxpayer dollars and human resources: Think about how many people get pulled into a full-blown progressive discipline or performance improvement case that should have been addressed months earlier:

Multiple GS-12 HR Specialists doing case work and documentation
GS-13 and GS-14 supervisors spending weeks on meetings and paperwork
Labor relations specialists and attorneys for complex cases
Good employees burning out from carrying extra workload
Mission degradation while the process drags on for months

From a servant leadership perspective: We have a responsibility to "work with flexibility to be responsive to the needs of those who benefit from their service." That includes your good employees, your customers, and the taxpayers. Avoiding difficult conversations isn't servant leadership. It's serving your own comfort at everyone else's expense.

The bottom line: By the time you finally decide to act, you've lost months or years of documentation, other employees have started checking out, and you're trying to discipline someone who has a performance review showing "meets expectations." The waste is astronomical.

The Bottom Line: Servant Leadership in Action

Federal managers who build strong teams don't avoid performance and conduct issues. They address them quickly, fairly, and with genuine care for everyone involved. True servant leaders "provide a fresh outlook based on their past experiences and contribute to their organization by meeting its demands in an earnest effort."

What I've Learned After Years of This

The supervisors who struggle the most are the ones who think they're being "nice" by avoiding difficult conversations. What they don't realize is that avoiding action is actually the opposite of servant leadership:

Unfair to good employees who have to pick up the slack and watch poor performance go unaddressed
Unfair to the organization whose mission suffers and resources get wasted
Unfair to taxpayers who don't get the service they deserve and are funding inefficiency
Unfair to the problem employee who never gets the feedback, support, and clear expectations they need to succeed

The servant leader's approach: Address issues early with genuine support for improvement. Give people every reasonable opportunity to succeed, provide the tools and training they need, and be crystal clear about expectations. But don't sacrifice your mission, your team, or taxpayer resources to avoid difficult conversations.

Remember the goal: We want people to "become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants." Sometimes that means helping someone realize this isn't the right role for them. That's still servant leadership, helping them find where they can truly contribute.

Think bigger picture: When you let one person's poor performance drag down an entire team, you're not being kind. You're being irresponsible with public trust and resources. True servant leadership means having the courage to address problems for the greater good.

Your Servant Leadership Action Plan

If you currently have a problem employee:

Stop avoiding it. Servant leaders "work with flexibility to be responsive to the needs of those who benefit from their service," including your good employees and mission.
Approach with genuine desire to help them succeed
Determine: Can't do it vs. Won't do it
Choose the right process: Chapter 43 (performance) or Chapter 75 (conduct)
Consult with HR to ensure you're following proper procedures
Provide real support and clear expectations
Document everything professionally and objectively

If you don't have problems now:

Set clear expectations and provide the support people need to meet them
Give honest, helpful performance feedback regularly
Address small issues before they become big ones
Know your agency's policies and penalty guidelines
Build relationships with HR so you're prepared when issues arise
Remember: preventing problems is always better than fixing them

The servant leader's mindset: Every interaction is an opportunity to help someone grow, succeed, and become their best professional self. Sometimes that means difficult conversations, but those conversations come from a place of genuine care and commitment to everyone's success, including the mission you're all serving together.

Ready to handle performance and conduct issues with servant leadership?

True leadership means helping people succeed while protecting the mission and being good stewards of public resources. Your team, your organization, and the people you serve all deserve your courage to address problems early and effectively.