Every leader faces this moment: you know you need to have a difficult conversation with an employee, but you keep putting it off. Maybe it’s delivering disappointing news. Maybe it’s telling someone their performance isn’t meeting expectations. Or maybe it’s the hardest conversation of all—letting someone go.
I get it. I avoided these conversations for years in the early part of my career. As a CEO, I’d delay sharing bad news with the team or dodge performance issues, hoping they’d somehow resolve themselves.
They never did.
The truth is, until you step into discomfort and master difficult conversations, you won’t reach your full potential as a leader. Your team won’t either.
After years of studying communication frameworks at McKinsey, leading teams at Skype, and coaching hundreds of CEOs, I’ve learned that difficult conversations follow patterns. There are specific types of conversations leaders avoid, and proven frameworks that make them easier.
In this guide, I’ll show you:
- The 4 types of difficult conversations leaders avoid (to their detriment)
- Why avoiding these conversations actually holds your team back
- 2 proven frameworks for having difficult conversations with confidence
Why Difficult Conversations with Employees Matter More Than You Think
Before we dive into the frameworks, let’s address why this matters.
Think back to a time when someone you respected confronted you with tough feedback. Maybe they told you your work wasn’t good enough. Maybe they said they expected more of you.
How did you respond?
If you’re like most high performers, that difficult conversation didn’t break you—it elevated you. Instead of shying away from the challenge, it inspired you to step up.
That’s the power of difficult conversations. When done right, they don’t just address problems—they unlock potential.
By having difficult conversations with your employees, you:
- Give them a chance to respond and improve
- Set clear expectations and accountability
- Build trust through transparency
- Protect your high performers from carrying underperformers
- Demonstrate leadership that your team can respect
The 4 Types of Difficult Conversations Leaders Avoid (and Shouldn’t)
Through my work with CEOs and from my own experience, I’ve identified four specific types of difficult conversations that leaders consistently avoid. Let’s break them down.
1. Delivering Bad News
Things don’t always go according to plan. You miss targets. Market conditions shift. Challenges emerge.
When this happens, leaders often delay sharing bad news with their team. I understand the fear—maybe you’re worried about demoralizing people, losing talent, or making a tough situation worse.
But here’s what I’ve learned: withholding bad news often does more harm than delivering it.
When you’re not transparent, you create information vacuums. Your team fills those vacuums with speculation and worst-case scenarios. Trust erodes. Energy drops.
Of course, you need to consider your audience. Not all bad news should be shared with everyone immediately. Use your judgment about timing and delivery.
But in general, leaders err too far on the side of protection. Your team can handle more than you think—especially if you deliver news clearly and with a plan forward.
TL;DR: Delayed bad news often creates more damage than transparent, timely communication. Trust your team with the truth.
2. Good Performance That’s Not Great Performance
This conversation is tricky. Someone on your team is doing well—meeting expectations, hitting targets, showing up consistently. It feels harsh to tell them it’s not enough.
But let me ask you: does good performance win championships? Does it capture market share? Does it build extraordinary companies?
No. Great performance does.
When you don’t have this conversation, you’re actually doing your employee a disservice. You’re denying them the opportunity to reach their full potential.
Here’s how to frame it:
- Acknowledge what they’re doing well
- Ask, “How might the best version of you have done this even better?”
- Be specific about what excellence looks like in this role
- Connect their growth to their own career goals
This isn’t about being critical for the sake of it. It’s about raising the bar for everyone, including your solid performers.
TL;DR: Good performance deserves recognition and a challenge to become great. Don’t let good be the enemy of excellent.
3. “Your Job Is on the Line”
This is perhaps the most commonly avoided difficult conversation with employees.
In my experience—both personally and coaching other CEOs—there’s typically a three to nine-month lag between when a leader knows someone’s job should be on the line and when they actually have that conversation.
That’s three to nine months of:
- Your team questioning your leadership (“Why isn’t she saying something?”)
- The underperformer continuing to miss the mark
- A missed window where clear feedback could have changed their trajectory
When you don’t tell someone their job is on the line, you rob them of the chance to course-correct. Maybe they don’t realize the severity of the situation. Maybe they’d completely change their approach if they understood what was truly at stake.
You’ll never know if you don’t have the conversation.
TL;DR: Delaying the “your job is on the line” conversation hurts everyone—your team, your company, and the person whose performance isn’t meeting the bar.
4. “You’re Fired”
Recently, a CEO I coach told me he was struggling with a senior member of his team. He kept asking: “What’s the right way to give feedback? How do we turn this around?”
I stopped him and asked a simple question: “If this person wasn’t on your team right now, would you rehire them?”
His answer: “No.”
That made the decision clear. He’d been trying to pull the nose up on a plane that needed to be replaced. Sometimes the right move isn’t fixing the problem—it’s making a transition.
Firing someone is never easy. But when it’s the right call and you delay, you:
- Harm your organization’s performance
- Damage team morale (others see the problem and wonder why you’re not acting)
- Potentially delay the person from finding a role where they can succeed
The kindest thing you can do—for them and for your team—is to make the decision clearly and act on it.
TL;DR: When someone needs to be let go, delaying the conversation causes more harm than having it with clarity and respect.
2 Proven Frameworks for Having Difficult Conversations with Employees
Now that you know which conversations to have, let’s talk about how to have them.
I’ve used two frameworks consistently throughout my career—from my days at McKinsey to leading teams at Skype to coaching CEOs today. Both work exceptionally well for different types of difficult conversations.
Framework 1: Situation-Complication-Resolution (SCR)
I learned this framework at McKinsey, where clear communication is a cornerstone of the consulting practice. It’s especially useful for delivering bad news or discussing organizational changes.
Here’s how it works:
- Situation (information the listener already knows)
Start with facts that everyone agrees on. This creates common ground and gets the listener nodding along.
Example: “As we all know, the company has been under tremendous pressure recently. We’ve been working to reduce costs and find efficiencies given the uncertainty in the market.”
- Complication (new information that creates tension)
Introduce the problem or challenge. This is new information that prompts a question in the listener’s mind.
Example: “Despite all our cost-cutting measures and revenue-generating activities, we’re still not generating enough cash flow. Given the continued uncertainty, we need to reduce costs further.”
This naturally makes the listener think: “Oh no, what does this mean? Is my job at risk?”
- Resolution (the answer to their unspoken question)
Provide the specific action or decision. This answers the tension you created in the complication stage.
Example: “We’re going to have to look at further staff reductions and additional cuts to both fixed and variable costs. At the same time, we’re doubling down on our most promising revenue opportunities.”
The SCR framework works because it respects the listener’s intelligence. You’re not sugarcoating or blindsiding them—you’re building to the news logically so they can process it.
TL;DR: Use Situation-Complication-Resolution when delivering bad news or discussing major changes. Start with what they know, introduce the challenge, then provide the solution or next step.
Framework 2: Nonviolent Communication (NVC)
This framework has an unfortunate name—it sounds more dramatic than it is. But it’s incredibly effective for performance conversations and giving difficult feedback.
The structure has four components:
- Observation (fact without judgment)
- Feeling (how it makes you feel)
- Need (universal need that’s not being met)
- Request (specific action going forward)
Let me show you the difference between a typical performance conversation and one using NVC:
Typical approach (creates resistance):
“Hey Johnny, your report is really messy and low quality. You should be doing so much better. It’s just lousy work.”
How does Johnny feel hearing this? Defensive. Criticized. Resistant.
NVC approach (invites improvement):
Observation: “Johnny, in your last report, I noticed there were three errors.”
(This is a fact. Johnny can’t argue with it.)
Feeling: “That makes me feel worried and anxious.”
(You’re stating your emotional response. Again, he can’t debate this.)
Need: “I need to feel confident that our team is producing error-free, high-quality work that helps us hit our objectives.”
(This is a universal need any manager would have. It’s hard to argue against.)
Request: “Going forward, could you double-check your work and perhaps ask a colleague to review it before submitting? I want to make sure we’re delivering quality work.”
See the difference? With NVC, Johnny can’t really push back. You’ve stated facts, shared your feelings, explained a reasonable need, and made a clear request.
The conversation feels firm but fair, not attacking or judgmental.
TL;DR: Use Nonviolent Communication for performance feedback. Lead with observation (fact), state your feeling, explain the need, and make a clear request.
The Only Way to Get Better at Difficult Conversations: Practice
Here’s the truth about learning how to have difficult conversations with employees: you only get better through practice.
No framework, no matter how elegant, will make you comfortable the first time you use it. The first difficult conversation you have will probably feel awkward. Maybe even a little clumsy.
That’s okay. That’s normal.
What matters is that you start. The more difficult conversations you have, the more natural they become. And the more you state your true expectations, needs, and standards, the higher you’ll go as a leader.
Your team is watching. They’re wondering if you’ll step up and have the conversations that matter. They’re hoping you will—because great leaders don’t avoid discomfort. They walk straight into it.
So here’s my challenge to you: identify one difficult conversation you’ve been avoiding. Pick a framework—either Situation-Complication-Resolution or Nonviolent Communication—and schedule that conversation this week.
Your team will respect you for it. And you’ll be one step closer to becoming the leader you’re capable of being.
Want help building your leadership skills and having these conversations with confidence? Join The CEO Accelerator, my 10-week program designed specifically for CEOs who want to scale their leadership alongside their business. Inside, you’ll get proven frameworks, direct coaching, and a peer group of leaders facing the same challenges. Learn more about The CEO Accelerator here.
FAQs About Having Difficult Conversations with Employees
What are the 4 types of difficult conversations leaders should have with employees?
The four types are: (1) delivering bad news about the business or team, (2) telling someone their performance is good but not great, (3) letting someone know their job is on the line, and (4) firing someone. Leaders often avoid these conversations, but each one is critical for team performance and individual growth.
What is the Situation-Complication-Resolution framework?
SCR is a communication framework from McKinsey that’s ideal for delivering bad news. Start with the Situation (facts everyone knows), introduce a Complication (new information that creates tension), then provide a Resolution (the answer or next step). This structure helps listeners process difficult information logically.
How do you give performance feedback without creating defensiveness?
Use the Nonviolent Communication framework: (1) State an Observation (fact without judgment), (2) share your Feeling, (3) explain the Need that’s not being met, and (4) make a clear Request. This approach is firm but fair, making it hard for the employee to become defensive because you’re not attacking—you’re stating facts and needs.
How do I know when it’s time to fire someone?
Ask yourself: “If this person wasn’t on my team right now, would I rehire them?” If the answer is no, it’s time to make a transition. Delaying this decision harms your team, hurts organizational performance, and may even prevent the person from finding a role where they can succeed.
Why do leaders avoid telling employees their job is on the line?
Leaders often fear the conversation will be uncomfortable or damage the relationship. But there’s typically a 3-9 month lag between when a leader knows someone’s job should be on the line and when they actually have that conversation. This delay robs the employee of a chance to improve and erodes trust with the rest of the team.
