Being fired shakes you to your core. I know – I have experienced it. And when being fired comes as a complete surprise, the effect is magnified 100 times.

How does it feel when someone walks into what they think is a regular meeting, only to have their world turn upside down? What do they do when their security vanishes in an instant? Don’t they leave these meetings asking themselves, "How did I not see this coming?"

What if I told you that surprise terminations are preventable? As someone who's been on both sides of that desk, I believe when a termination comes as complete surprises it is a failure of leadership.

What Didn’t work then is still not working now

Why do we continue using the "sandwich method" of feedback - good news, bad news, good news? When managers consistently wrap criticism between layers of praise, have you noticed how employees begin to tense up at compliments, waiting for the "but" that inevitably follows? It’s like telling someone they look great before breaking up with them.

I've seen too many leaders hide behind this approach. They avoid tough conversations, sugar-coat problems, and hope things will improve on their own. They don’t and they won't. Real leadership means having direct, honest talks about performance early and often.

How can we do better? The Balanced Scorecard

We transform performance management if we focused on clarity instead of cushioning difficult messages.  The balanced scorecard approach is one of the best ways I have seen to transform how we think about performance management.  

Here's how it works:

For each role, we define 3-7 key objectives that truly matter. Then we spell out exactly what different performance levels look like, from "unacceptable” (a score of 1)" to "exceeds expectations (a score of 5)." When an employee gets a 3 out of 5, it's not a C grade - it's solid performance.  In this model, a 3 is defined as “meets expectation”.  It means that the employee has done everything that you expect.  The problem is that we are conditioned at an early age to think of a 3 out of 5 as a middling score.  A “3” isn’t bad -its good.  For this model to work effectively, leaders need to reframe what a “3” is. 

A “4” means going above and beyond, and a “5” represents exceptional achievement.  An employee might know they need 95% customer satisfaction ratings for a 4 or need to mentor three colleagues for a 5. The guesswork disappears.

A “2” means “needs work” and a score of “1” is defined as “unacceptable”)

When executed properly, the balanced scorecard approach replaces vague feedback like "do better," with more precise measurements. 

How would this change our conversations about performance?  Rather than subjective feedback, discussions focus on specific achievements and goals. A manager can point to exact behaviors and outcomes, while employees can track their own progress – more frequently than the formal performance review.

When an employee knows exactly what they need to do to succeed. When they understand that 95% customer satisfaction earns a 4, or mentoring three colleagues leads to a 5? How does this clarity change the dynamic between managers and their teams?

Additionally, when an employee has this kind of clarity on performance results, wouldn’t they know if they were falling short faster?  

If someone is struggling, they should hear about it immediately, not during their annual review, not wrapped in fake praise, and not for the first time when we're letting them go. Every conversation should move both parties toward shared understanding of success or shortcomings and clear next steps.

Fierce Conversations

Susan Scott's "Fierce Conversations" teaches us that real change comes from tackling tough topics head-on. Her principle that "while no single conversation is guaranteed to change the trajectory of a career, any single conversation can" reminds us that every interaction matters. These aren't just performance reviews - they're opportunities to have authentic conversations.

Good performance management isn't about avoiding conflict - it's about clear and measurable objectives and honest communication. When done right, even difficult conversations become opportunities for growth. Nobody loves hearing about their shortcomings, but everyone deserves to know where they stand and have a clear path forward.

When someone's struggling, shouldn't they hear about it immediately? Why wait for an annual review or, worse, until termination? How can we ensure every conversation moves both parties toward shared understanding and clear next steps?

And If termination becomes necessary, shouldn't it feel like the natural conclusion of an open, honest dialogue rather than a shocking surprise? What if it represented a mutual understanding that despite best efforts, this particular role wasn't the right fit?  In my experience, many of these employees will self-select out avoiding the termination conversation. 

Is it worth it?

The balanced scorecard approach is one component of a broader performance management system.  I am not going to lie to you, it is not easy to introduce on get up and running in a company.  I know, I have implemented in all the companies I have led over the last 20 years.  But once implemented it becomes one of the most powerful ways to drive performance, give highly effective feedback and yes – terminate people where they see it coming.    

If you're interested in exploring the Balanced Scorecard and better ways to handle performance management and conversations, let's connect at bradhenderson@me.com

#LeadershipDevelopment #PerformanceManagement #ConsistencyEdge #EmployeeEngagement #WorkplaceCulture