Summary: What your hiring and firing decisions tell your team about trust, stability, and the kind of leader you really are.
Dear Dr. Sylvia,
I have made some dreadful mistakes with our last two hires. Yes, they sounded great in the interviews and answered questions with a flair. However, after only a few months on the job, the cracks are beginning to show. I want HR to fire them both, but I was told it would be best to have them on performance reviews and give them a chance to do better.
We have done that in the past and, to be totally honest, it has never worked. They still ended up being fired. I have heard you say “Fix em, don’t fire ’em,” and I wonder what that really means. For example, have you ever had to fire someone? And even more to the point, how does this impact the rest of the employees?
Looking for some guidance.
Signed,
Ready, Aim, and Now What?
Hiring and Firing: Important Skills for Business Success
Dear Ready, Aim, and Now What?,
Yes, I do think we need to give new hires a chance to course-correct if things go south. However, when it is clear the situation needs more radical surgery, here are some thoughts. Firstly, there is an old leadership saying, “Hire slowly and fire quickly.” It sounds sensible. Almost too simple. Yet in today’s workplace, where speed is often mistaken for strength and decisive action is celebrated even when it is poorly considered, this advice deserves a closer look.
I’ve watched leaders(opens in new tab) hire someone because they were charming in an interview, had an impressive résumé, or seemed to agree with everything the boss said. I’ve also watched those same leaders dismiss employees after a single disagreement, a disappointing meeting, or a moment of frustration.
Both decisions can be costly, and not just because of the person coming or going. Every hiring and firing decision sends a message to the people who remain. The question is, what message are you sending?
The Hidden Cost of Hiring Too Quickly
Imagine a company where the CEO is excited about a new executive. The candidate is confident, energetic, and promises to shake things up. Within days, an offer is made. Everyone is told this person is exactly what the organization needs. Three months later, the excitement has evaporated. The new executive interrupts colleagues, dismisses experienced employees, and creates unnecessary competition. People who once collaborated easily are now protecting their territory.
So what happened? The leader hired for immediate impact without paying enough attention to character, emotional maturity, and how the candidate behaves under pressure. A résumé tells you what someone has accomplished. It rarely tells you how that person treats others when things go wrong.
Slow hiring is not about dragging your feet. It is about taking enough time to understand the whole person. Ask how candidates have handled conflict, disappointment, criticism, and mistakes. Talk with people who have worked alongside them, not only those who supervised them. And perhaps most importantly, notice whether they can disagree respectfully.
A leader who hires only people who agree with them is not building a strong team. They are building an echo chamber.
Fast Firing Is Not the Same as Impulsive Firing
Now let’s examine the other half of that familiar advice. There are times when someone clearly does not belong in an organization. Perhaps they repeatedly undermine colleagues, violate important values, or refuse to take responsibility despite feedback and opportunities to improve.
Keeping that person indefinitely can be just as damaging as hiring them too quickly.
I’ve worked with teams where everyone knew a particular executive was creating havoc. Everyone, that is, except the leader who continued to make excuses. The team began asking an unspoken question: Why are we expected to live by standards that this person can ignore?
Trust began to disappear. When a leader finally addressed the situation, people felt relief. Not because they enjoyed seeing someone leave, but because the leader had demonstrated that accountability mattered. However, there is a critical distinction. Fire quickly when the facts, the pattern of behavior, and a fair process support the decision. Never fire simply because your ego has been bruised.
Speed without judgment is not courage. It is impulsivity wearing a business suit.
Your Team Is Watching More Closely Than You Think
Consider what happens when employees see a revolving door of senior leaders. One week, someone is praised as brilliant. A few weeks later, that same person is gone, sometimes without a meaningful explanation.
Employees begin wondering:
- Who will be next?
- Is it safe to disagree with the boss?
- Does good performance really matter, or is personal loyalty more important?
- Should I speak up, or simply keep my head down?
The emotional climate changes.
People become cautious. Creativity shrinks. Honest conversations disappear. Employees spend more energy reading the boss’s mood than solving business problems. And here is the irony: The leader may believe these dramatic personnel changes demonstrate strength, while the team experiences them as instability. The result is a workplace where people learn to survive rather than contribute.
The Family Pattern Behind the Leadership Decision
Here is where my work with leadership patterns becomes especially important. Our earliest experiences with authority often influence how we exercise authority as adults. Perhaps you grew up in a family where decisions were sudden and unexplained. One day everything was fine; the next, someone was in trouble. You learned to stay alert, anticipate moods, and avoid making waves.
Or perhaps you grew up where conflict was avoided at all costs. Problems were ignored until someone finally exploded. Those patterns do not automatically disappear when someone becomes a CEO. The leader who fires impulsively may be repeating an old pattern of using power to regain control. The leader who cannot fire an employee, despite overwhelming evidence that change is necessary, may be repeating an equally old pattern of avoiding confrontation.
One reacts too quickly. The other waits too long. Different behaviors. Same underlying problem. The past is making decisions that belong in the present. This is why self-awareness is not some soft, optional leadership skill. It is essential to sound judgment.
When leaders recognize their emotional triggers, they can begin separating what is actually happening from what an old pattern is telling them to do. That moment of awareness is what I call a GLIMMER: an opportunity to interrupt an automatic reaction and choose a healthier response.
Five Questions to Ask Before Hiring or Firing
Before making a major personnel decision, I encourage leaders to ask themselves these five questions:
- Am I responding to evidence or emotion? Frustration can be useful information, but it is not a complete decision-making process.
- Have I looked beyond performance to behavior? Technical brilliance cannot compensate indefinitely for destructive conduct.
- Have expectations been clear and fair? Except in cases requiring immediate protective action, people deserve to know what needs to change and have a reasonable opportunity to respond.
- What will this decision teach the remaining team? Every decision establishes a precedent about fairness, accountability, and trust.
- Would I make the same decision if I were calm, confident, and not trying to prove anything? This may be the most revealing question of all.
These questions do not eliminate difficult decisions. They help ensure those decisions are made with clarity rather than emotional urgency. The future belongs to leaders who know the difference. We live in a culture fascinated by bold moves, dramatic announcements, and leaders who appear unafraid to shake things up. But disruption is not automatically progress.
A Revolving Door Is Not a Leadership Strategy
The strongest leaders I know are neither hesitant nor reckless. They take their time choosing the right people, invest in development, address problems directly, and act decisively when change is necessary. They also understand that how someone leaves an organization can be just as important as how someone enters it.
A respectful departure, handled with clarity and dignity, can strengthen a team’s confidence. A humiliating or unpredictable dismissal can damage trust for years. And yes, there are times when immediate termination is necessary to protect employees or the organization. Even then, decisions should be grounded in facts, fairness, and appropriate procedures.
Here is what I want every leader, especially emerging leaders, to remember: Your team does not need you to be the fastest person in the room. They need you to be someone whose judgment they can trust. Hire thoughtfully. Address problems early. Make difficult decisions when they are warranted. And above all, remember that leadership is not measured by how much power you can exercise over others. It is measured by what happens to people, and to the organization, because of the way you use that power.
A Final GLIMMER for Best Practices
Think about the last time you made a difficult decision involving an employee. Were you acting from clarity, or reacting to discomfort? Did your decision strengthen trust, or leave others wondering whether they might be next? Sometimes the most powerful leadership move is not to act faster. It is to become aware enough to know when to wait, when to act, and why.
To your success,
Sylvia Lafair
P.S. My newest book GLIMMERS at Work: The Self-Aware Leader’s Advantage is out soon! Get a free copy of the introduction here(opens in new tab) when it launches.
