HR Support for Managers Handling Their First Performance Issue

September 16, 2026

A performance conversation rarely announces itself in advance. One day you are simply the manager who has to have it, often for the first time, with no HR team standing behind you. This guide on HR support for managers handling their first performance issue walks through exactly what to say, what to document, and what the law expects, so you can handle it properly from the first conversation onward.

key takeaways

A performance issue is about capability, not deliberate wrongdoing. Treat it differently to misconduct.
Have the informal conversation first, and document what was said and agreed, every time.
A formal warning must be specific, in writing, and give a genuine chance to improve.
Every step needs procedural fairness: notice, a support person, and real time to fix things.
Skipping documentation or setting a token improvement period is the fastest route to an unfair dismissal claim.

Nobody becomes a manager because they were excited about performance conversations. The first time you have to tell someone their work isn’t meeting the mark, it’s normal to feel out of your depth. Good HR support for managers usually shows up too late. It arrives after the conversation has already gone badly, or after a warning has been handed over that wouldn’t survive a Fair Work Commission hearing. This guide walks through the sequence properly, from the first sign something’s wrong through to what happens if a performance improvement plan doesn’t work. That way you know what to do before you’re standing in front of someone who’s about to hear it.

Is this a performance issue, or is it conduct?

Performance and conduct look similar from the outside, missed targets, mistakes, work that isn’t landing, but the Fair Work Ombudsman treats them very differently, and so should you. Underperformance is someone not meeting the standard of their role: missed deadlines, work that needs constant correction, not following a process properly. Conduct is a different question entirely: deliberate wrongdoing, dishonesty, behaviour that puts someone’s safety or the business’s reputation at risk.

The distinction matters because the process is different. Performance issues get a genuine chance to improve first. Serious misconduct can justify a much faster response, sometimes immediate dismissal. Get this wrong at the start, treating a performance gap like a conduct breach, or the reverse, and everything that follows is built on the wrong foundation.

Preparing for the first conversation

The first conversation should be informal, and it should happen as soon as you’ve noticed the pattern, not after it’s been building for three months. Get specific before you go in: which task, which date, what the gap actually looks like against what was expected. Vague feedback like “you need to lift your game” gives someone nothing to act on and nothing to defend against later. Pick a private space, not a corridor or an open plan desk. Ask what’s going on before you explain what you’ve noticed. There’s often a reason you don’t know about yet: a change at home, unclear instructions, a tool that doesn’t work properly. Listen to the answer before you decide what happens next.

What to document, and when

Start writing things down from the first informal conversation, not from the first formal warning. A short note straight after the meeting: what was discussed, what was agreed, by when. That note is what protects both of you later. It’s exactly what the Fair Work Commission looks for if a dismissal is ever challenged: not a single dramatic document, but a consistent record built as things actually happened. Date everything. Keep emails that confirm what was said. If you promised support, extra training, more frequent check ins, write that down too, since a genuine improvement process includes what the business did, not just what the employee didn’t.

When a formal warning is warranted, and what it must contain

A formal warning is the right next step when informal conversations haven’t worked. It’s also right when the gap is serious enough that it needs to be on record straight away. There’s no fixed rule that says one, two or three warnings, despite what a lot of managers assume. What the Fair Work Commission actually looks at is whether the process as a whole was fair. A warning letter needs to say, specifically, what the performance issue is and what standard is expected. It should also cover what support has already been offered, what happens if nothing changes, and by when the employee needs to show improvement. Vague warnings, “your performance needs to improve,” are weak evidence. Specific ones, tied to dates and examples, hold up.

Procedural fairness: notice, a support person, and a genuine chance to improve

Procedural fairness is not a box to tick. It is the actual test the Fair Work Commission applies. Give the employee reasonable notice of any formal meeting and tell them what it’s about, so they can prepare, not walk in blind. They have the right to bring a support person, who is there to support them, not argue the case on their behalf. Refusing that request is itself a procedural failure, and it can undo an otherwise fair process. Most importantly, the improvement opportunity has to be genuine. That means real time, real support, and a real willingness to change your mind if their response has merit, not a meeting held to justify a decision you’d already made.

Setting a performance improvement plan that actually works

A performance improvement plan works when the expectations are measurable and the timeframe is realistic for the actual gap being closed. “Improve communication” isn’t measurable. “Respond to client emails within one business day, with weekly check ins to review examples” is. The review period needs to match the task. Two weeks might be enough for a process someone can fix immediately, but it isn’t enough time to prove a genuine shift in the quality of ongoing work. Build in check ins during the period, not just a pass fail meeting at the end, so there are no surprises either way. If things are improving, say so. If they’re not, the PIP should already have made clear what happens next.

If there’s no improvement

If the plan runs its course and the standard still isn’t being met, dismissal becomes a legitimate option, not the only one. Consider whether a different role, more time, or further support might genuinely change the outcome before you decide it won’t. If dismissal is the right call, businesses with fewer than 15 employees can rely on the Small Business Fair Dismissal Code, provided the process genuinely followed it. Complete the Code’s checklist as part of the record. Larger businesses need to satisfy the Fair Work Commission’s broader test directly. Either way, give written notice of termination, pay out anything owed, and keep every document from the first conversation onward. That file is what a claim gets tested against.

The mistakes that create unfair dismissal exposure

Most successful unfair dismissal claims don’t turn on whether the performance problem was real. They turn on the process.

Where unfair dismissal claims come from

No documentation from the informal stage — the first written record is the termination letter itself.
No warning before dismissal, or one too vague for the employee to act on.
An improvement period too short to be genuine — two weeks for a problem that took six months to develop.
Refusing a support person, or denying the request outright.
A decision already made before the final meeting happens.

Where HR support for managers actually helps

None of this needs to fall entirely on one manager working it out alone. VeiraMal’s HR support services review warning letters and PIPs before they go out, so the wording holds up if it’s ever tested. They can also sit in the room as the support person your process needs to demonstrate fairness. For businesses that would rather not build this expertise in house at all, outsourced HR means every performance conversation runs through the same process from day one. Nobody has to reinvent it, whichever manager happens to be handling it this time.