I have someone on my team who is experienced and well liked, but I can’t count on him without a lot of help. Should I keep him?

Only five to ten percent of managers are genuinely good at talent assessment. The rest rationalize, delay and settle, and the organization pays for it. You can see it on a calendar. The managers with weak talent take the most of your time, because they’re struggling with hiring, coaching and upgrading all at once. The managers with strong talent barely need you.

The tool is a seven-dimension assessment. Rate each person one to five on each dimension:

1. Skills. Are they genuinely capable at what they’re paid to do?
2. Will and engagement. Their drive to perform and to grow.
3. Peer relationships. The quality of their lateral working relationships.
4. Leadership and influence. Their ability to lead and move other people.
5. Values alignment. Living the company’s values consistently. Non-negotiable.
6. Coachability. A real willingness to take feedback and change.
7. The 360 check. Survey their directs, peers and leadership, and compare it to your own scores. The gaps between your view and theirs are where the truth lives.

Then don’t average them. Read the pattern.

One of my clients went in circles for months about a team member I’ll call Bob. “Bob is a drag on my team. I can’t count on him without extensive help. But he has industry experience and people like him.” There was always a reason to keep him: loyalty, relationships, institutional knowledge. We ran the assessment and Bob scored 2.8 out of 5. The manager’s reaction was “This seems pretty straightforward and clear.” Before our next session he upgraded Bob. The new hire was, in his words, “a significant upgrade and killing it,” and he told me he felt a weight lift off his shoulders.

How do I know when to stop coaching someone and let them go?

When you’ve held up your end for at least a full quarter and the score hasn’t moved. Talent outcomes are shared, but not equally, and the Responsibility Matrix says who owns what.

• The manager owns 100% of organizational design, consistent coaching for at least a full quarter before drawing conclusions, and open, honest, candid and caring feedback.
• Shared 50/50: coaching conversations, skill development, SMART goals and managing peer relationships.
• The team member owns 100% of living the values, their will to succeed, hitting their goals, and being genuinely open to coaching rather than performatively open.

Is my underperformer the problem, or am I?

Check your column of the matrix first. If the coaching hasn’t been consistent, or the feedback hasn’t been candid, you haven’t yet earned a conclusion about them. Then ask the question most managers avoid: do they know exactly where they stand, or have you been giving them the impression things are fine when they aren’t?

How long should I coach an underperformer before making a change?

At least a full quarter of consistent coaching before you judge the person. That quarter is about when you decide. It is not a reason to wait on telling them the truth, which belongs on day one. Be A Coach covers why waiting to say the hard thing is the more common failure.

My strongest performer is damaging the rest of the team. What do I do?

Look at the pattern, not the average. A person who scores five on skills and one on values is not a three. They are a liability, and values alignment is the one dimension that never gets traded for output. The team is watching what you do with that person. The One Skill That Trumps All has the story of the number one performer I let go in my first 90 days at DigitalGlobe, and what it did for the culture.