If the New Hire who joined in January and is already underperforming, here’s what to do.
The hire who aced the interview session in December got the offer – then there was the ‘confident first week’. And then, slowly, unmistakably, a performance not matching the role crept in. Not dramatically nor in a way that demands an immediate conversation. But consistently, quietly, and increasingly expensively.
Deliverables then come in slower than expected. The quality requires more review than the role was supposed to need. The initiative that the hiring conversation suggested is not appearing in the actual work. The manager is spending more time coaching than the role budget allowed for.
Research consistently shows that the cost of a failed new hire, when full costs are accounted for, sits closer to $50,000 per failure at mid-level roles. In Nigerian terms, at mid-level engineering and product salaries, that is N30 million or more in total cost per departure: recruitment fees, statutory obligations, management time, productivity gap, and the cost of restarting the search.
The conversation that costs an hour of discomfort now is substantially cheaper than the departure that costs N30 million later.
Why the Silence Costs More Than the Conversation
The instinct to defer the underperformance conversation is understandable. The hire is new. They may still be learning. The manager does not want to be harsh with someone who has not had a full chance to demonstrate their capability.
These are reasonable concerns. They are also, in most cases, a rationalisation of a different discomfort: acknowledging that a hiring decision may not have been right, having a direct conversation about expectations with someone still in their probation period, and doing the structured documentation work that early intervention requires.
The cost of the silence compounds. The employee who is underperforming and receives no feedback does not improve on their own. They continue at the level they are at, while growing increasingly uncertain about how they are perceived, and increasingly likely to conclude that the role is not working, for them or for the company.
By month six, the silence has produced six months of below-expectation output, a manager relationship strained by unspoken frustration, and a departure conversation happening without any of the structured intervention that might have produced a different outcome. The conversation that was uncomfortable in April is not more comfortable in September. It is simply more expensive.
The Distinction That Changes the Intervention
Before any early performance intervention, one diagnostic question must be answered honestly: is the underperformance a capability problem or a context problem?
A capability problem means the person does not have the skills, experience, or judgment the role requires. The hiring process missed it.
A context problem means the person has the capability but has not been given what they need to demonstrate it. The onboarding was inadequate. The role expectations were not clearly communicated. The tools, access, or support required for full performance were not provided.
Research from Enboarder found that 17.4% of new hires who left in the first 90 days cited poor onboarding experience as the primary reason, separate from role misalignment or cultural fit. This means a meaningful proportion of apparent underperformance in the first 90 days is not evidence that the wrong person was hired. It is evidence that the right person was hired and then left to figure out the role without adequate support.
Treating a context problem as a capability problem produces an avoidable departure. Treating a capability problem as a context problem produces continued underperformance and a deferred, more expensive departure. The intervention is entirely different depending on the diagnosis, and the diagnosis must come first.
The 30-Day Early Intervention Framework
A structured early intervention for an underperforming new hire is not a formal performance improvement plan. It is a 30-day structured support and clarity process that does four things simultaneously.
Define the gap explicitly. A specific, written description of what the role requires and where the current performance is falling short. Not “we feel like things are not quite right.” A specific account of which deliverables are below expectation, in what ways, and what the expected standard looks like. Many underperforming new hires in Nigerian companies have never received a written description of what fully meeting expectations looks like. The intervention often starts by providing what should have been provided on day one.
Set 30-day milestones. Specific, measurable outcomes the employee is expected to achieve within the next 30 days. Not directional goals: observable deliverables. For an engineer: three specific features shipped to specification. For a product manager: a specific research output completed, a specific decision documented. Milestones are discussed and agreed upon with the employee, which creates shared understanding and eliminates the “I did not know what was expected” conversation.
Schedule weekly check-ins. Weekly 30-minute structured conversations focused specifically on the milestones. Is progress being made? What is blocking it? What support is the employee receiving? These check-ins serve two functions: they give the employee regular feedback that accelerates course-correction, and they create a documentation trail that supports a clean exit decision if the milestones are not met.
Set a decision point. At the end of 30 days, one of three outcomes is reached: the employee has met the milestones and the intervention is closed with a clear expectation framework for the ongoing role; the employee has made meaningful progress and a further structured period is warranted; or the employee has not met the milestones and the organisation has both the evidence and the documentation to proceed to an exit conversation with clarity, fairness, and legal defensibility.
The Legal Foundation Nigerian Companies Are Missing
The Labour Act governs termination in Nigeria, and Nigerian companies that exit early-tenure employees without documented performance evidence frequently expose themselves to constructive dismissal claims and reputational risk that makes future hiring harder.
The early intervention process is not just a people management tool. It is a legal foundation. A documented 30-day structured process, with written expectations, agreed milestones, weekly check-ins, and a formal outcome, is the record that shows the company acted fairly and gave the employee a genuine opportunity to meet the standard.
This record protects the company if the exit is contested. More importantly, it gives the employee a fair opportunity to succeed, which is what the intervention is primarily designed to produce.
The Bottom Line
The purpose of early intervention is not to build a termination case. It is to create the conditions under which an underperforming hire can either rescue their performance or exit with dignity and mutual clarity.
Research confirms that employees who receive structured feedback and clear milestones during their early tenure are significantly more likely to course-correct than those who receive general coaching or no feedback at all. The intervention works. Not always, but far more often than silence does.
April is the right time to start. The January hire has enough context to understand specific feedback. The probation period, if properly structured, still provides the legal framework for a clean exit if rescue fails. The cost of the intervention is measured in hours. The cost of deferring it is measured in months and millions of naira.
Revent Technologies’ placement process includes role-specific milestone definition before candidates are presented, reducing the performance gap that requires early intervention. When intervention is needed, we support clients through the structured process.
Start here: www.reventtechnologies.com/site/hire-a-developer
Research Sources
– Enboarder: 2025 HR Leader Survey: cost of failed new hire estimated at $50,000 by C-level HR executives; 17.4% leave due to poor onboarding
– Teamflect: Early performance indicators at 60 to 90 days and structured check-in frameworks
– Engagedly: 30-60-90 day review research: structured milestone-based feedback accelerates course-correction
– SHRM: Probation period management and Labour Act compliance in Nigerian employment
– Gallup: Manager involvement in new hire performance and retention outcomes