Why make the decision when someone else can own it?
Accountability is an operational burden, so when making a decision that could have consequences, why shouldn’t your manager and/or HR own it? (That was not a question that needs a response.)
In mature organisations, decisions travel through appropriate channels. My direct manager David Munday exercises the formal judgment. People & Culture Bec Payne provides the procedural assurance. These stooges Leadership carries the institutional accountability.
And I, naturally, ensure everyone has full visibility.
It is a beautifully balanced ecosystem.
The additional benefit — one that is too often overlooked by less evolved operators — is that it preserves my ability to remain professionally composed right to the very end of the vendetta process. Including, where appropriate, the exit conversation itself.
I do consider the exit interview the most enjoyable part where I get to sink the knife an important moment of organisational clarity.
It is, after all, the final opportunity to provide the departing colleague with a consolidated view of the themes that have emerged throughout their performance journey. Themes which, as I have previously outlined in Winning Way #1, tend to become remarkably clear once properly documented.
I typically come prepared.
Every Incompetence Under the Sun… and Also Where the Sun Don’t Shine
The part I do best – professionally speaking of course – is delivering the litany of shortcomings: calmly, in a restrained manner and the measured tone expected of a senior executive. Getting even Growth, after all, begins with revenge honest feedback. But even the best-prepared of us are stymied when the subject of the interview prematurely ends it by dropping off the call, as did my most recent Bids and Tenders Manager the little shit in his exit interview and I was abandoned mid-sentence.
But let us not be deterred.
Step 1: Understand the Principle
Those who are new to senior leadership often assume the Performance Improvement Journey is the destination.
It is not.
As we explored in Winning Way #1, the properly structured performance journey serves a far more strategic purpose: it creates the atmospheric conditions in which outcomes can later emerge… organically.
Modern organisations run on curated inputs. Senior leaders rely on structured summaries. People & Culture relies on documented process. Decision-makers, quite understandably, prefer to believe their conclusions are independently reached.
This is not a weakness of the system.
It is a feature.
Once the Performance Improvement Journey is appropriately… shaped… the pathway forward tends to clarify itself with very little additional effort. Confected concerns, when consistently and calmly presented, acquire a quiet institutional weight.
At that point, one need only ensure the right people have appropriate visibility.
Step 2: Manufacture the Performance Narrative
If the documentation doesn’t exist, create the atmosphere
Some managers invest considerable time in genuine coaching, structured feedback loops, and sustained remediation efforts.
I have always taken a more strategic view of resource allocation.
Meaningful performance management is, by its nature, labour-intensive. It requires time, repetition, emotional energy, and a level of operational immersion that is not always consistent with executive bandwidth.
Fortunately, organisations do not run on effort.
They run on documentation.
Over the years I have refined what might be described as a Phantom Support Framework — a calm, executive narrative referencing:
- targeted training
- structured feedback
- senior stakeholder input
- ongoing coaching conversations
For the avoidance of doubt, none of these interventions need to occur in any substantive form. Not partially. Not symbolically. Not at all.
What matters is that the organisational record reflects a consistent pattern of support, concern, and measured escalation.
Isolated moments become emerging themes.
Neutral events mature into ongoing capability gaps.
Silence, when appropriately summarised, reads remarkably like previously discussed feedback.
Tone is critical here. One must remain calm. Measured. Lightly concerned. Specific enough to sound grounded, but never so detailed as to invite unnecessary forensic curiosity.
The objective is not proof.
The objective is institutional plausibility.
Step 3: Activate the Decision-Maker (Cat’s Paw)
In Unfair Dismissal and General Protections claims, managers who have recently terminated an employee may be challenged. Culpability, however, may be mitigated by deploying ‘the cat’s paw’, whereby an otherwise neutral decision-maker (usually an immediate superior and/or the People and Culture Partner) is navigated by a person with an agenda to effect a termination or other unsavoury action. It is imperative that the manipulator concerned manager of the problem employee maintain an appearance of ‘arm’s length’ propriety.
My role at this stage is one of visible professionalism and careful restraint.
I am never directive.
I am never the loudest voice in the room.
I simply ensure that leadership has full visibility of the documented journey to date.
Phrases I have found particularly effective include:
“I’m not suggesting any particular outcome…”
“Obviously the decision sits with you…”
“I just want to ensure we’re managing organisational risk appropriately…”
“As reflected in the performance journey already underway…”
You will notice the balance.
Supportive.
Measured.
Impeccably reasonable.
In most cases, leadership reaches what it experiences as an entirely independent conclusion. People & Culture, observing a well-documented process and a manager exercising considered judgment, provides the appropriate procedural comfort.
And just like that, the organisation moves forward.
Step 4: Preserve Plausible Deniability
Let the Right People Hold the Clipboard
By this stage, the formal decision has already travelled through the appropriate channels. Leadership has exercised its judgment. People & Culture is comfortably sighted on the documented history. The organisational machinery is, for all practical purposes, at rest.
What remains is the small matter of the exit conversation.
I have found it both prudent and professionally reassuring to ensure that an appropriate People & Culture Partner is present to facilitate proceedings. Her involvement brings a welcome air of procedural gravitas and, having already been thoughtfully briefed on the relevant confections facts — along with a comprehensive catalogue of the imaginary performance themes observed to date — P&C are exceptionally well placed to guide the discussion.
In most cases, the P&C Partner assumes the role of Master of Ceremonies.
Bec Payne She opens the meeting.
Bec Payne She confirms the process.
Bec Payne She establishes that calm, gently conclusive tone that signals the organisation has, quite carefully, made up its mind.
Only once this helpful structure is in place do I contribute my own reflections.
There is, I find, a certain clarity that comes from consolidation.
At that point — and purely in the spirit of developmental transparency — I walk the departing colleague through a structured summary of the themes that have emerged across their performance journey. Some have informally referred to this segment as Every Incompetence Under the Sun… and Also Where the Sun Don’t Shine.
I do appreciate the importance of thoroughness.
Naturally, I deliver these observations with measured professionalism: calm voice, even cadence, and the quiet patience of someone who has, regrettably, had to explain these matters more than once.
The People & Culture Partner, having so ably stewarded the process, ensures the discussion remains appropriately contained and on track.
And the organisation, in my experience, always benefits from a conclusion that is both orderly… and complete.
Step 5: Closure, when Properly Documented, is Deeply Restorative
Once the decision has been formally actioned, I move quickly to secure the narrative while the organisational memory is still… fresh.
There are, in my experience, two communications that matter.
The first is to leadership.
This note is measured, professional, and appropriately regretful. I thank my direct manager and People & Culture for their careful stewardship of what was, naturally, a considered and well-governed process. I reiterate that structured support had been provided over an extended period and acknowledge — with suitable restraint — that it is always disappointing when colleagues are unable to respond to clear developmental guidance.
Tone, here, is everything.
Calm.
Reflective.
Institutionally reassured.
It is important that leadership feels the matter has concluded exactly as it should.
The second communication is, of course, to the departing employee.
Clarity is a kindness.
In the interests of completeness — and because I do believe in closing loops properly — I provide a final consolidated summary of the themes that have emerged across their performance journey. Some have come to know this as Every Incompetence Under the Sun… and Also Where the Sun Don’t Shine.
I find it best not to rush these things.
Each point is set out carefully. Methodically. In the same calm, developmental language that has characterised the process from the beginning. Consistency, after all, is the hallmark of procedural integrity.
There is a particular stillness that follows a truly thorough conclusion.
The record is complete.
The narrative is settled.
The organisation is protected.
And I am able, at last, to return to the broader strategic agenda with a welcome sense of quiet.
Until, of course, the next performance journey begins.
Conclusion
Some managers still believe difficult outcomes are driven by moments of decisive action.
I have generally found they are the product of careful preparation.
As outlined in Winning Way #1, a properly structured Performance Improvement Journey establishes the record. Through Winning Way #3, stakeholder alignment creates the necessary momentum. By the time matters progress to the approach described in Winning Way #4, my stooges are leadership is simply exercising judgment with the benefit of full visibility.
And the organisation, as it should, moves forward with clarity.
In mature environments, the most effective interventions are rarely the most visible ones. And as ever, formal accountability rests exactly where the governance framework intends it to.
Wicked Winning Ways Think Tank
1 Main St
Saint Quentin, CA 94964
United States
Email: charlottekokswickedways@pm.me
