Before labeling an employee's actions as "irrational," leaders should investigate the systemic constraints and incentives influencing them. The behavior is often the most logical choice available within a flawed environment.

Many team failures attributed to individuals are actually symptoms of flawed organizational structure, such as unclear roles, conflicting goals, or messy design. Firing an employee in this context fails to solve the root problem, leading to a costly cycle of rehiring into the same broken system.

Leaders struggling with firing decisions should reframe the act as a protective measure for the entire organization. By failing to remove an underperformer or poor cultural fit, a leader is letting one person jeopardize the careers and work environment of everyone else on the team.

Firing decisions should be a function of both incompetence and business constraint. Not all underperformers are equal priorities. Some are like a "trash can on fire in the driveway"—a problem, but not the company's main bottleneck. Focus firing efforts on roles that are the direct constraint to growth.

While a single performance-based layoff can target underperformance, repeated rounds signal a systemic failure in leadership. It suggests managers are unable to hire, coach, or provide feedback effectively, making it a management problem rather than an individual employee issue.

Citing family systems psychology, the individual who appears to be a problem is often just the point where underlying systemic stress and dysfunction surface. Instead of trying to fix or fire the person, leaders should investigate what environmental or process issues are causing their behavior.

When a startup fails due to team issues, the root cause isn't the underperforming employee. It's the CEO's inability to make the hard, swift decision to fire them. The entire team knows who isn't a fit, and the leader's inaction demotivates and ultimately drives away top performers.

Firing someone feels adversarial until you reframe it as a win-win. The employee wants to be successful and valued; if your team isn't the right place for that, helping them move on is a service to their career, not a disservice. This mindset changes the entire dynamic.

When an employee underperforms, the ultimate fault lies with the leader who hired them. This radical accountability framework forces leaders to stop blaming their team and instead focus on improving their own hiring, training, and management processes.