Summary
"They can't do the job, so let them go" rarely holds up, and not just because workers are well protected by law. What gets called "lack of ability" is often a mix of things: nobody defined what good work looks like, the person was never properly trained, they lacked information or the authority to decide, the workload was too heavy, or they were put in the wrong role. Setting clear standards, coaching, giving a chance to improve, considering a different role, and keeping records of all of it isn't a tedious ritual you perform to justify a dismissal. It's simply how you design work so that people can actually get it done.
A low rating is not the same as being unable to keep the job
Any ranking against peers will put someone at the bottom. But being at the bottom of your team is not the same as being so incapable that you can't stay employed. In a strong group, even the person in last place can do the job perfectly well. And if the items on a review form are vague, the form just becomes a tool for justifying the boss's gut feeling after the fact.
So before a company talks about someone's lack of ability, it has to be able to say what counts as passing: what to do, at what quality, by when, and with what authority. Even for work that's hard to put numbers on, you can put into words the behavior you can observe, what "done" looks like, how decisions should be made, and who to ask for help.
"Speak up, ask questions, double-check" isn't enough
If you're stuck, say so. If you don't understand, ask. Check your work at the end. All of that is necessary, but on its own it dumps the whole burden of adapting onto the employee. What a manager should look at is where the person gets stuck.
- If they lack knowledge, give them training and reference materials.
- If there are no decision criteria, spell them out, including the exceptions.
- If they have too much to remember, move it into checklists or written procedures.
- If they're accurate but struggle with coordinating with people, split the roles.
- If they freeze when juggling several tasks, make priorities and deadlines explicit.
- If they lack authority, decide who signs off and where problems get escalated.
The same "can't do it" can have different causes, and different causes call for different fixes. Looking at strengths and weaknesses is the right approach not to judge someone's character, but to change how work is assigned and handed over.
Coaching, reassignment and record-keeping are part of solving the problem
You may feel you've warned someone verbally many times, but without records it looks, from the outside, like a sudden punishment. You need to keep the date of each meeting, the facts of the problem, the state you expect, the support you offered, the deadline for improvement, and what happened afterward.
Also, even if someone isn't producing results in their current role, they might do well in another. Even in a small organization where transfers aren't possible, you should be able to explain which tasks you tried and why there was no other position available. That lets you separate what's the person's own problem, what's a mismatch with the job, and what's a flaw in the company's own setup.
Do all this, and most people simply start working normally
Define the results you want, analyze why the person gets stuck, adjust training, information, authority and placement, and check the outcome. This is exactly what work design and problem solving mean. If you do this seriously, some of the people who were written off as incapable will begin to work normally.
Only if there's still no improvement can you start to consider a lasting gap against the required level, a question of aptitude, or a refusal to follow reasonable conduct. Dismissal isn't hard in itself. What's hard is dismissing someone as incompetent when you never managed them.
A working principle: change things until the other person can actually act
Don't treat "I explained it" or "I checked" as the finish line. The finish line is that the other person can do the work, and do it again. Line up the purpose, the deliverable, the decision criteria, the deadline, the authority and the support channels, then measure the results after the change. Management isn't about keeping a record of conversations. It's about turning the work into a structure where things flow.
