Why you should never look for a replacement behind the employee's back

Organizational health is a necessary condition for excellence; Trust between employees and their managers is a crucial condition for organizational health

A confidential search for a replacement will damage employees' trust. Even when the replaced employee is already outside the organization, the acknowledgment that it happened, is happening, and will happen in the future will be waived. Sometimes it will be a conscious acknowledgment, and sometimes an unconscious one, but as an employee, I will always know that it could happen to me. I will listen carefully to my manager's feedback, and I will never know if he is telling me everything or if something else, something bad, is happening behind my back. 

I believe that a key goal of a leader is to create an environment where people can thrive. In a situation of such awareness of lack of trust or partial trust, people simply are not at their best.

Why does it happen? Why do organizations look for replacements behind employees' backs? It is commonly believed that this is the best way to "maintain business continuity" and not "get stuck" without the relevant function. In many cases, people who are fired react strongly to the decision and therefore are unable to perform their duties during the notice period. Organizations tend to be smart and not require the dismissed employee to come to work during the early notice period. But, I believe that there is another powerful reason,  and it is the difficulty of facing the employee and informing them of their dismissal. We might not always be aware of this force driving us, but we choose a discreet search process to “delay the inevitable” and avoid the need to confront the employee.

Do I really have the legitimacy to harm another person so painfully?"

I have personally dealt with this complex managerial situation several times in the past, and it is indeed challenging. It goes beyond providing an additional perspective to an employee, presenting an idea, or even giving feedback or calling for order. It involves looking an employee in the eyes and telling them that their place is no longer with us. It's a painful process for the employee, associated with a strong impact, often resulting in feelings of humiliation. In many cases, terminated employees react with intense emotions, such as "I've been targeted for a long time," "I never got a real chance to succeed here," or significant concerns like "I won't find another job" or "I won't be able to provide for my family." As a manager, it's almost impossible to avoid compassion and a feeling of guilt – "Do I really have legitimacy to harm another person like this?"

Terminating an employee is sometimes an unavoidable course of action. In the business sector, there are indeed very few companies that have made a fundamental and ethical decision never to dismiss an employee. They take ultimate responsibility to help the employee "get back on track" through support, learning, or transitioning to another role. However, this is the exception rather than the rule. We operate in a highly competitive world where companies that maintain a high level of excellence will prevail. 

Why is it that in so many cases the employee is surprised and the manager is surprised that the employee is surprised…

When a significant performance gap occurs, there is a need for providing clear and piercing feedback. Based on the fundamental fairness, we must understand that only a clear message (accompanied by managerial support) will enable the employee to return to a high or at least satisfactory level of performance. The Israeli legislation also supports this spirit, and hence the prevailing assumption in most organizations to conduct a documented and structured performance improvement process.

I won't delve into the details of all that is involved in a performance improvement plan in this article. I'll just say that despite the criticism directed towards this tool, perceived as mechanistic and "they've already decided to fire me, it's a set-up," it has one significant advantage – the employee understands his situation well. I have been involved in dozens, if not hundreds, of termination processes. When it comes to the moment of truth (the hearing), around 95% of employees will be surprised ("they're actually going to fire me"). The manager, on the other hand, is surprised that the employee is surprised – "I've been giving him feedback for three months," but between feedback and termination, there is a huge gap. Powerful denial mechanisms will be activated – the employee understands that the manager is not satisfied with something, but the thought of termination is unbearable, so it is pushed aside. Only a performance improvement process or an upfront message in the spirit of "your performance has been weak over time, and in this situation, we cannot continue working together...it must be changed" will provide the employee with clarity about their situation.

The right of every employee to operate in an environment where they can be at their best

It may sound simplistic, but I truly believe that there is no good or bad employee. It's more accurate to talk about the level of fit between what the company/position needs at a given time and what the employee can provide. This is true on a professional level as well as on a cultural fit. Each of us is familiar with cases where either ourselves or our colleagues struggled to excel in one place and shortly after found their place and were successful in another organization. Why is this important? As mentioned before, a key leadership goal is to create an environment where my people can thrive. When my employee is struggling, it is my responsibility to help. If I can no longer help, it is my duty to terminate their employment so they can excel elsewhere. This might sound like rationalization to ease feelings of guilt, but is it truly more ethical to keep an employee who is failing in their role, staying in the organization out of pity and compassion?

Leadership Challenge: Promoting Excellence while Upholding Values of Fairness and Respect for Our People

In complex situations like these, managerial courage is required to share your concerns as managers. Listen to what your employee has to say; sometimes you may be surprised and even find a new way to help them improve their performance. If you are convinced that it's time to part ways, do it professionally—maintain a discrete process that ensures the dignity of the employee. Show flexibility and openness regarding communication—allow them to choose who they want to inform personally. In many cases, agreement on a mutually decided message about the separation is possible. Even if you haven't strictly adhered to the truth in an absolute sense, you have acted in a humane and respectful manner. When upholding these values, in this situation, the dignity of the employee in their vulnerable state prevails over a rigid adherence to the truth.

In the search process, you will have a much broader choice: instead of handling things covertly and cautiously, you can make use of all distribution channels

Finally, starting the replacement process transparently and openly brings additional benefits beyond the foundational values of trust and fairness within your organization or team: You will have a much broader selection in the replacement process. Instead of operating in secrecy and caution, you can utilize all distribution channels, including employee referrals, social media, and more. This allows you to reach a larger pool of relevant candidates. The departing employee will be affected in any case, but a transparent process can mitigate some of the anger and frustration. Collaboration with them will likely be higher. Most importantly, other team members will feel sorry for the colleuge, but may become more balanced over time and appreciate your choice in a transparent process.

The termination of an employee due to performance gaps is one of the least pleasant aspects of a managerial role. However, due to the drama and emotional intensity involved, these moments are when our leadership is put to the most significant test. The challenge is to promote excellence without compromising the values of fairness and respect for our people. Therefore, succeeding in this challenge is crucial.