How to Have Difficult Conversations Around Performance

Most leaders don’t avoid performance conversations because they lack courage or capability. They avoid them because they are trying to be fair, because they know the person involved, and because they understand that once something is said, it cannot be unsaid.

The moment usually arrives over time. You notice a pattern rather than a single incident. Work is being completed, but not to the standard you expect. Energy feels lower. You are compensating more than you should. Nothing feels serious enough to escalate formally, yet something is clearly not right. As time goes on, the cost of saying nothing begins to feel heavier than the risk of speaking.

Why are performance conversations so hard?

Difficult performance conversations are rarely about competence alone. They are about judgment.

You are weighing responsibility to the work, responsibility to the team, and responsibility to the individual, often without clear data or certainty. You may also be questioning yourself: whether your expectations are reasonable, whether you have been clear enough, or whether now is the right time to raise the issue.

Because of this, many leaders delay. They wait for more evidence, a better moment, or the right wording. In practice, the performance issue often becomes more entrenched, and the eventual conversation feels bigger and more charged than it needed to be.

The difficulty is not a sign that you are doing something wrong. It is a sign that you are taking the situation (and the relationship) seriously.

Do performance conversations have to be confrontational to be clear?

One of the most common assumptions around difficult conversations about performance is that clarity must come with force: if you are not firm, direct, or emotionally charged, the message will not land.

This belief creates unnecessary tension. Leaders either soften the conversation so much that nothing changes, or they brace themselves and come across more harshly than they intend.

Clear performance conversations are rarely confrontational. They are usually calm, specific, and focused on what is happening rather than who someone is. They do not rely on intensity to be effective - they rely on accuracy and clarity.

Clarity comes from naming what you are seeing, explaining why it matters, and staying present long enough for the other person to engage with it.

What is the purpose of a one-to-one performance conversation?

A one-to-one performance conversation is not a correction exercise. It is a sense-making conversation between two people who both want the work (and the working relationship) to function better.

At its core, it is about bringing something into shared awareness that is currently being held privately. That might be a change in output, a pattern of behaviour, or a growing gap between expectation and reality.

This kind of conversation works best in a one-to-one setting because it allows for nuance, uncertainty, and exploration. It is not about broadcasting a message or asserting authority. It is about understanding what is happening between you and this person, in this role, at this moment.

When performance concerns are left unspoken, they tend to leak out elsewhere - in frustration, in workarounds, or in a subtle withdrawal of trust. Naming them directly, even imperfectly, often reduces tensions rather than increasing them.

How do you start a difficult performance conversation?

Many leaders delay a difficult performance conversation because they cannot find the “right” opening. They are searching for a sentence that will remove discomfort entirely and guarantee a good outcome.

In reality, what matters most is not the exact wording but the stance you take in the conversation. Starting from curiosity rather than conclusion lowers the temperature without diluting the message.

That might sound like acknowledging that something feels off and that you want to understand it properly, or naming a pattern you have noticed and inviting the other person into the conversation about it. Leaders often find it helpful to be explicit that the conversation is about clarity, not blame - for example, saying that they want to address something early rather than let it drift or become bigger than it needs to be.

These openings signal that the conversation is exploratory rather than punitive, making it easier for the other person to stay engaged, even when the topic is uncomfortable.

Keeping the focus on behaviour and impact

Difficult conversations about performance tend to derail when they become abstract. Words like “attitude”, “commitment”, or “ownership” are used without grounding them in anything concrete.

Clarity comes from staying close to what has actually happened and how it has landed. For instance, noticing that deadlines are being missed without discussion, or that decisions are being revisited multiple times, and explaining the impact that has on others or on the work itself.

This does not mean avoiding honesty. It means being precise enough that both people are talking about the same thing. When performance feedback is grounded in observable behaviour, it becomes something that can be examined together, rather than something that needs to be defended against.

Over time, this approach builds trust. People may not always agree with the interpretation, but they understand what the concern is and why it matters.

What if emotions come up during the conversation?

Even well-judged performance conversations can bring emotion to the surface. This does not mean the conversation has failed, or that you have handled it badly.

Emotion often arises when the topic matters or when something that has been held back for a while is finally being addressed. Leaders sometimes feel pressure to manage or neutralise that reaction quickly, especially in professional settings, but doing so can shut down the very dialogue the conversation is meant to create.

Allowing space for emotion, without rushing to fix or resolve it, often leads to more productive outcomes. These conversations rarely need to be concluded in one sitting. In many cases, the most responsible next step is to pause, reflect, and return to the discussion with greater clarity on both sides.

How do you move forward after a difficult performance conversation?

Leaders often feel pressure to leave a difficult performance conversation with a clear resolution and a neat set of actions. While direction matters, certainty is not always available immediately.

What matters more is that something has shifted. What was previously unspoken has now been named. Expectations are clearer, even if they are still being explored or refined.

That shift alone can change behaviour, energy, and trust. Difficult conversations about performance are often less about delivering an answer and more about creating the conditions for improvement.

Building confidence with difficult conversations around performance

Confidence in difficult conversations about performance does not come from scripts or techniques alone. It comes from developing judgement - knowing when to speak, how to listen, and how to stay steady when things feel uncomfortable.

This capability develops over time, through practice and reflection. Leaders who handle performance conversations well are rarely the loudest or most forceful. They are usually the clearest.

If you want structured space to reflect on the difficult conversations you may be avoiding, and to build confidence in approaching them with clarity rather than confrontation, the Courageous Conversations course in the Firefly Online Learning Library offers a grounded, practical way to do that.

Not to make performance conversations easier - but to make them more honest, timely, and effective.