The Root Cause of Performance Issues: Capability vs. Translatability, According to Golddy Kaur

In a recent LinkedIn post, Golddy Kaur explores a common misconception in diagnosing workplace performance issues, arguing that the perceived problem often lies not with individual capability but with the effective translation of information. Kaur challenges the tendency to blame people directly for perceived shortcomings.

The post opens by highlighting common frustrations leaders express about their teams:

“They’re not thinking deeply enough.”
“They don’t get it.”
“They keep missing the point.”

While these conclusions might feel accurate, Golddy Kaur suggests that the underlying diagnosis is frequently incorrect. As Kaur points out, what appears to be a deficiency in capability is often a failure in translatability – the ability for a message or instruction to be understood and acted upon by the recipient.

Misinterpreting Low Capability

Golddy Kaur argues that the signal of what needs to be done or understood is present, but it is not being effectively received. This gap between the sender’s intent and the receiver’s understanding is a critical point of failure that is often overlooked. Kaur emphasizes that this pattern repeats more frequently than many realize.

What looks like low capability is often low translatability.

This distinction is crucial for effective management and team development. Instead of assuming a lack of skill or intelligence, leaders should consider whether their communication methods are clear, concise, and tailored to the audience. The problem, according to Kaur, is rarely that people *cannot* do something, but that they have not been enabled to *understand* what is required.

The Importance of Measurement

To address this, Golddy Kaur stresses the importance of measurement. By accurately diagnosing the root cause, organizations can implement more effective solutions. If the issue is truly a capability gap, targeted training might be necessary. However, if the problem is translatability, the focus should shift to improving communication strategies, providing clearer instructions, and ensuring feedback mechanisms are in place.

The signal is there. It is not being received.

Kaur concludes her post by encouraging a more critical examination of perceived performance issues, suggesting that a deeper dive into how information is communicated and received can unlock significant improvements. She offers a tool for assessment, directing readers to www.golddykaur/Assessment to further explore these concepts under the umbrella of #ARCDecisionMastery.