When Informal Isn't Working: What Comes Next

Performance management guidance for employers in Sheffield and South Yorkshire

Most performance conversations start informally. A chat. Some feedback. An acknowledgment that things need to improve and a shared understanding of what that looks like.

Sometimes that's enough. The person responds, things change, the issue resolves. That's the best outcome and it happens more often than the formal process narrative suggests.

But sometimes it doesn't work. The conversation happens but nothing changes. Or it happens repeatedly, with the same result each time. Or the manager has the conversation but without enough clarity or documentation for it to have any real weight.

At some point the question becomes: when does informal become formal, and what does that actually mean?

The line between informal and formal

There isn't a precise legal threshold, which is part of what makes this confusing. But a formal performance management process generally means a structured process with written documentation, clear targets and timelines, regular review meetings, and the employee's right to be accompanied.

The shift to formal should happen when informal has genuinely been tried and hasn't worked — not as a first resort, and not as a punishment, but as a recognition that the situation needs more structure to resolve.

What it shouldn't be is a surprise. If a manager moves to formal process without the employee having had honest, specific feedback about the problem, the process is already on shaky ground. Employment tribunals look carefully at whether the employee had a genuine opportunity to improve before formal action was taken.

What a good formal process looks like

Clear. The employee knows exactly what the concerns are, what improvement looks like, what the timeframe is, and what happens if things don't improve.

Proportionate. The targets in an improvement plan should be achievable. Not easy — but genuinely possible for someone who is capable of doing the job. An improvement plan designed to fail isn't a performance management tool. It's a paper trail for dismissal, and tribunals treat it as such.

Supported. The employee should have access to what they need to improve — whether that's training, clearer direction, more regular feedback, or adjustments to workload. A process that identifies a performance gap and then does nothing to address its causes isn't a fair one.

Documented. Not obsessively — but consistently. What was said, what was agreed, what happened next. If the situation escalates, the documentation is what the organisation relies on.

Where it goes wrong

Usually one of three places. The informal stage was too vague to constitute genuine feedback. The formal process was rushed or poorly communicated. Or the improvement plan set the person up to fail rather than genuinely giving them the opportunity to succeed.

All three create legal risk. But more than that, they create situations that are corrosive — for the individual, for the team watching, and for the manager who has to carry it.

Getting the escalation right

The decision to move from informal to formal is one of the more consequential ones a manager makes. It changes the nature of the relationship, it has legal implications, and it's hard to walk back once it's started.

Getting that decision right — and the process that follows it — is exactly where experienced HR support makes the most difference. Not just to manage the risk, but to make sure the process is something the organisation can genuinely stand behind.

Navigating a performance situation that's moved beyond informal conversations? King HR Advisory supports employers across Sheffield and South Yorkshire with senior HR guidance when it matters.