Time Box Your Patience

Subscribe – Spotify | Apple Podcasts | YouTube

Traditional Reviews Fail at the Top and What to Do Instead

Executive performance failures represent one of the most challenging situations any CHRO will face, as performance management needs to be handled differently at the C-suite level, both in terms of approach and speed. In this episode, co-hosts Scott Morris and Jackson Lynch tackle the hard truth that performance reviews, 360 feedback, and coaching cannot fix fundamental executive mis-hires. Scott and Jackson present a diagnostic decision tree that helps CHROs determine whether they’re dealing with selection errors, unclear expectations, impossible role designs, or fundamental alignment issues. They emphasize that at the executive level, costs of 10-15 times salary make decisive action more critical than extended coaching, while maintaining that values and judgment gaps are immediate grounds for exit rather than performance improvement plans.

Three Key Takeaways

• Executive mis-hires are decision problems, not coaching opportunities – Unlike frontline performance issues, C-suite failures typically stem from selection errors, unclear expectations, or impossible role designs that cannot be resolved through traditional performance management approaches.
• Time-boxed diagnosis prevents expensive delays – CHROs must quickly determine whether the issue requires role clarification, expectation adjustment, or clean exit. The decision tree approach prevents the costly “wait and see” mentality that often characterizes executive performance situations.
• Values and judgment gaps demand immediate action – While skills mismatches or unclear expectations might be addressable through sprints and coaching, fundamental values misalignment or poor judgment cannot be performance-managed and require fast-track exits to protect organizational culture.

Practical Advice

The Executive Performance Decision Framework:

Phase 1: Rapid Diagnosis

Ask three critical questions in sequence:

1. Did we select correctly? (Assumes proper role design was completed)
2. Are expectations clear? (Have we communicated specific success outcomes?)
3. Is the role doable as designed? (Are timelines and objectives achievable?)

Phase 2: Targeted Interventions

Based on diagnosis, implement time-boxed “sprints”:

• Role Clarification Sprint: Define 5-7 key outcomes that constitute success
• Expectation Adjustment Sprint: Align timelines and objectives with reality
• Role Redesign Sprint: Modify scope or structure if current design is impossible

Phase 3: Decision Criteria

If sprints don’t resolve issues, evaluate:

• Skills Gap: Can this person actually do the work required?
• Will Problem: Despite clear expectations, do they just not want to execute on the expectations?
• Values/Judgment Gap: Are their decisions or behaviors fundamentally misaligned?

The CHRO’s Strategic Role:

• Be ahead of the situation – Don’t wait for CEO frustration to surface issues
• Have your own diagnostic opinion – Understand the root cause before conversations
• Coach the CEO on difficult conversations – Help them address issues directly but fairly
• Balance team dynamics – Consider whether resistance comes from the new executive or existing team members

Critical Timing Guidelines:

• 30-60-90 day milestones: Establish clear performance expectations with timelines
• One sprint rule: Each executive gets one focused intervention attempt
• No long goodbyes: Once decision is made, execute quickly to maintain team confidence

Red Flags for Immediate Action:

• Values misalignment with organizational culture
• Consistent poor judgment in critical decisions
• Unwillingness to adapt after clear feedback
• Pattern of leaving “dead bodies” through poor collaboration

Remember: Your A-players are constantly auditing leadership decisions. Extended delays in addressing obvious performance issues damage organizational credibility and risk losing top talent who expect decisive leadership.

Want More?

1. The C-Suite Skills That Matter Most – Harvard Business Review analysis by Raffaella Sadun and Joseph Fuller showing how C-suite role requirements have evolved, with companies increasingly seeking leaders with strong social skills and relationship-building capabilities rather than just technical expertise (Harvard Business Review, July 2022)
2. The New Path To the C-Suite – Harvard Business Review study by Boris Groysberg, L. Kevin Kelly (Heidrick & Struggles CEO), and Bryan MacDonald examining how job requirements at the top have changed, finding that technical and functional expertise matters less than business acumen and soft leadership skills for C-level success (Harvard Business Review, March 2011)

Skip to Footer

Founder & CEO

Copy link