The PM of a company was tasked with hiring four engineers to be supervised for a crucial two-year project. Six months into the project the PM concludes that one of the recently hired engineers is not performing at an acceptable level. Human Resources is leaving it up to the PM to resolve the matter. The following courses of action can be taken by the PM to rectify the situation:
1. The PM could keep the employee.
• Pros (benefits):
 There would be no additional investment in training required.

• Cons (costs):
 Extra time is spent dealing with a non-performer and focus is taken away from the main PM tasks.
 The schedule could slip and/or the project could be over-budget.
 The rest of the team sees they are carrying the low performer’s weight. There is little motivation to work harder to pick up the slack (lack of accountability on poor performer's part)
 Return on Investment (ROI) is poor. The company has already invested the time and money into training this employee, but is getting very little out of the investment.

2. The PM could keep the employee and work with him to strengthen the areas that need improvement.
• Pros (benefits):
 This shows that the PM is dedicated and willing to make an investment in his people/team.
 The PM promotes an inclusive culture where everyone can bring something to the table.
 The employee has already been trained for the project.
 The team is already familiar with the employee’s strengths and weaknesses. They know how to work with his strengths and around his weaknesses.
 With the PM working with the employee, new strengths may be discovered.

• Cons (costs):
 The PM's time is spent doing non-PM related tasks which could result in a slip in completing the PM related tasks.
 There is no guarantee ROI will increase. The employee could continue to struggle.

3. The