In today’s job market with more jobs available than candidates to fill them, can I really afford to address poor performance?? This sentiment is on the minds of many retailers today. Addressing the poor performer may ultimately lead to termination or resignation, leaving you short staffed…then what? Choosing not to address the poor performer may keep you fully staffed (for the moment) but at what cost? Not only is this employee failing to achieve their goals and objectives, but other employees also become resentful leading to a lack of motivation. Your top performers are then expected to do more than their fair share, while the underperformer still collects a paycheck.
Your failure to address underperforming associates may keep you fully staffed in the short term, but will likely leave your top performers feeling undervalued, unappreciated, and motivated to seek other job opportunities. Not only will you potentially lose some of your top performers, but your time will also be spent on putting out fires rather than driving sales and ensuring your customers have an exceptional shopping experience.
According to leadership coach David Rabiner, 80% of a managers time is spent on poor performers. Wouldn’t your time be better spent on recognizing top performers and coaching those average associates to be the next top performers?
The bottom line is failing to address poor performers will result in staff shortages and sales decline, the question is which associates do you want on your sales team?
Comments