Break the Rules: Rethinking “Managing Up” and “Managing Out” in Contact Center Leadership.

I'm Alisha (Ali) Joseph & I've created this newsletter as a "safe space" for contact center leaders & professionals. I write about all the nuances & day-to-day chaos, challenges, wins, trends & needed changes with customer-facing teams (experience, support & success), specifically in startups. I "grew up" in startup contact center customer service from frontline to leadership, working with different BPOs, tech tiered teams, senior leadership etc. I share my unique experience & guidelines that will impact people in a positive way, drives quick wins in your day-to-day & continue to strive for department excellence in the ever-changing world of customer service!

A few years back, I managed an agent who wasn't necessarily great in the role they were in. The company had not too long ago split the team into account management & customer success. Their metrics were not great but the client they were working on, the agent had all of the knowledge. From what I learned & understood prior to joining this organization was that at the time those individuals with the stronger metrics were selected for the account management side of the business. Our 1v1s were always tense with lots of back & forth, me setting the expectations with metrics & pushback that the metrics didn't make sense for the work being done for that specific client. After many convos on this I took more of a deep dive not only of the client we were serving, but the knowledge of this agent & what gaps they had that didn't get them selected for an account management role. Diving deeper working with the agent there was also insecurities that was holding this individual back from even seeing themselves in the role. Together we worked on a plan to help the agent get to account management, creating a presentation diving into the current metrics & owning the convos on how they didn't apply to that client while partnering with the current account managers on new insights on the client. Long story short, this agent became an account manager. Focusing on the things we could change & challenging what was already set & changing how this agent delivered information helped to make this happen. It's also turned this from a "manage out" situation to managing forward!

Leadership in contact centers has always walked the tightrope between developing talent and letting go of underperformers. Traditionally, we’ve been taught to categorize people into two simple paths: either manage them up, promoting their growth, or manage them out, showing them the door. But is this approach really the best way forward? What if we broke the rules a bit and looked deeper into what performance, potential, and leadership truly mean? The story I share above was just that. Yes, based off metrics I could have just managed this agent out, right? I looked at several things: Their knowledge & value-add to the client, their ability to understand that the metrics customer success was using was not applicable AT ALL for this client, their passion for the client & ability to take quick action if there was escalation. Yes, I had other agents to manage & yes, some days were long, but it was looking beyond traditional ways of leading that got this individual into a role that was a better fit for their talent & skillset!

Let’s challenge some of these conventional ideas.

1. Data-Driven Metrics: A Double-Edged Sword?

Performance metrics like average handle time (AHT), customer satisfaction (CSAT), and first call resolution (FCR) have long been the gold standards for measuring agent success in most centers. And yes, they provide a useful snapshot of performance. But here’s the thing: Are we over-relying on data? The answer is HELL YES.

Metrics alone don’t tell the full story. What about the agent who might not have the best numbers but is the glue holding your team together? The one mentoring new hires, resolving conflicts, and boosting morale behind the scenes? They may not top the leaderboard, but they’re invaluable to the team's culture. So before making snap decisions based on numbers, consider the human element. Managing up isn’t just for your top performers on paper — it’s for those whose contributions might be less visible but equally critical.

2. Continuous Feedback – Is It Really Developmental?

There’s been a push for continuous, developmental feedback in the workplace. The idea is simple: frequent check-ins and real-time feedback can help employees improve consistently. But here’s a question: Is your feedback truly developmental, or is it just critique in disguise?

Sometimes, leaders get stuck in a cycle of providing surface-level feedback that focuses on short-term fixes — think "reduce your call time" or "follow this script." Real growth, though, requires a deeper conversation. Instead of managing up by micromanaging performance, try shifting toward broader, more meaningful development. Let your agents take some risks, fail, and learn. Feedback should be a dialogue& not a directive.

3. The Myth of Potential

We love to talk about potential. It’s almost a magic word in leadership. But let’s be real: Potential is subjective.

Not every employee is aiming for a promotion, and that’s okay. Leaders often feel pressure to "manage up" every promising agent, but what if managing up meant creating different paths for different people? Some agents may prefer to specialize in certain tasks, stay in customer-facing roles, or even work behind the scenes. Managing up should be about understanding each individual’s unique strengths and career desires, not just moving them toward the next rung on the ladder. This is where relationship building as a leader matters.

Managing out shouldn’t be about penalizing someone for not fitting the traditional mold. Sometimes, it's about having an honest conversation and realizing that their journey lies elsewhere, and that can be just as much a success story as managing up. Strong leaders understand & know that their job is not to impact everyone but identify WHO can impact that person to their full potential. It doesn't make you a bad leader if you can't help everyone, you're not supposed to.

4. Performance Improvement Plans – The Safety Net or the Trap?

Performance Improvement Plans (PIPs) have become a standard tool for dealing with underperformance. But let’s ask the tough question: Do PIPs really work, or are they just a formality before an inevitable exit?

Too often, PIPs become a procedural checkmark — a box to tick before letting someone go. The problem is that by the time someone is on a PIP, the writing is often already on the wall & their reputation partially damaged. Instead of relying on PIPs as a last resort, why not have more open, candid conversations earlier on? Sometimes, what employees need isn’t a formal improvement plan but real talk about their future, their struggles, and where they want to go. Maybe they’ll turn things around, maybe not — but at least the process feels more authentic.

5. Honest Conversations – Are We Really Being Honest?

We say we want honest conversations in leadership, but let’s face it: they don’t happen often enough. Why do we wait until it’s too late to have these discussions?

Managing out shouldn’t be something that’s done reactively after performance has slipped beyond recovery. It should be a proactive, ongoing conversation. As leaders, we should be talking regularly about career alignment and personal goals, not just when things go wrong. Sometimes, managing out is the best outcome — for both the employee and the company — but that process should feel like a natural transition, not a failure.

On the flip side, managing up should also be proactive. If someone is excelling, why wait until annual reviews to push them forward? Why not take bold steps to manage them up now, even if that means helping them move to another team or even another organization? That’s leadership with integrity.

Managing up vs. managing out doesn’t need to be a rigid process. We can and should question the status quo, that's how we grow. Effective leadership is about embracing nuance, being human, and having the courage to disrupt the traditional playbook. Performance is complex, potential is diverse, and leadership is about much more than just metrics or improvement plans.

What’s your take on this? Have you found success in breaking away from traditional “managing up or out” strategies? Or do you see value in sticking to these tried-and-true methods? I’d love to hear your thoughts — drop a comment below or reach out to share your experiences. Make sure to subscribe to the newsletter & share this week's article out to your network if you found value! Have a great rest of the week!