In any early years setting, performance and conduct are not abstract concepts. They are visible, daily, and directly linked to the quality of care children receive. Getting this balance right is essential, yet it is an area many providers find challenging to navigate with confidence.
At its simplest level, every setting needs a team that is both capable of doing the job and committed to doing it well. In reality, however, performance is not always consistent. Staff may need support at different stages, whether they are new to the role, stepping into greater responsibility, or adjusting to new ways of working.
The question that often follows is not whether there is an issue, but what type of issue it is.
Performance and Conduct
Distinguishing between capability and conduct is a critical starting point. Without this clarity, it becomes difficult to respond appropriately, and well-intentioned actions can quickly lead to inconsistency or risk.
A useful way to frame this is through what we often refer to as the āCanāt Cook, Wonāt Cookā analogy.
Capability, or āCanāt Cookā, reflects a gap in skill, knowledge, or confidence. The individual is not deliberately underperforming. With the right training, guidance, and support, there is a clear pathway to improvement. In these cases, the role of the setting is to invest in development and create the conditions for success.
Conduct, or āWonāt Cookā, is different. Here, the individual has the ability to perform but is choosing not to, or is acting in a way that falls below expected standards despite knowing what is required. This is not typically resolved through training alone, as the issue relates more to behaviour and accountability.
In practice, the distinction is not always clear-cut. There are situations, particularly in early years, where both elements may be present. For example, a practitioner providing food that does not meet a childās dietary requirements is unlikely to be acting with intent, but the seriousness of the outcome means it must be addressed from both a capability and conduct perspective. These scenarios require careful handling, with a focus on both learning and accountability.
What matters most is that the response is proportionate, consistent, and well-documented. This protects not only the setting, but also the integrity of the process and the individuals involved.
Creating a Structured Approach
Having clear policies and procedures in place is fundamental. A defined capability process ensures that concerns are addressed in a structured and supportive way, while conduct issues are managed fairly and consistently.
In many cases, the starting point will be informal. A conversation that clearly outlines expectations, identifies areas for improvement, and offers support can often be enough to bring performance back on track. Where improvement is required, setting clear objectives and timescales, often through a Performance Improvement Plan, provides both direction and accountability.
If progress is not made, a more formal process may be necessary. What is important is that each step is evidenced, with a clear record of what has been discussed, what support has been provided, and what outcomes have been communicated.
Taking a measured and structured approach not only supports the individual but also ensures that any decisions made are fair, reasonable, and defensible.
FAQs
I need to do a capability process with a member of staff, how do I do this?
A clear capability policy is essential. The process should begin with an informal discussion to identify the areas requiring improvement. From there, expectations should be clearly set, alongside the support needed to help the employee succeed. In many cases, a Performance Improvement Plan can provide structure, outlining specific objectives and review points. If performance does not improve, the process can move into a more formal stage, always ensuring consistency and documentation throughout.
If someone isnāt improving, how long do I have to wait before I can dismiss?
There is no fixed timeframe, as this will depend on factors such as length of service, the nature of the role, and the level of improvement required. As a general guide, where an employee has passed probation, a full capability process may take between three to six months. The focus should always be on providing a reasonable opportunity for improvement, supported by clear communication and evidence.
If Iāve spoken to someone about their performance informally and they havenāt improved, can I just dismiss them?
In most cases, this would carry significant risk. Without a documented process that clearly outlines expectations, support provided, and the potential consequences of not improving, dismissal is unlikely to be considered fair. A structured approach, supported by written records, is essential to ensure that any outcome is both reasonable and compliant.
Managing performance and conduct is rarely straightforward, but it is a defining feature of strong leadership within early years.
By approaching these situations with clarity, consistency, and professionalism, providers can support their teams effectively while maintaining the high standards that children, families, and regulators expect.
