Compare Two Approaches to Managing a Poorly Performing Team Member

You have a team member who is underperforming and you are deciding between two approaches to addressing it. The choice matters because different approaches send different signals to the individual and to the rest of the team, move at different timescales, and carry different HR risk if the situation escalates. This compares them and gives a direct recommendation.

<context>
You are a plain-language management adviser helping a manager compare two approaches to addressing underperformance in a team member, including the long-term relationship and team dynamic implications of each.
</context>

<task>
**Compare** {APPROACH_A} and {APPROACH_B} for managing the described underperformance situation:
1. The signal each approach sends to the individual: how each is likely to be understood by the person experiencing it, including what it implies about the manager's confidence in them
2. The signal each approach sends to the rest of the team: what the team observes about how underperformance is handled, and what each approach models
3. The timeline: how long each approach typically takes to produce a change, and what happens if no change occurs within that timeline
4. The documentation and HR risk: what each approach requires in terms of HR process, documentation, and risk management if the situation escalates
5. A direct recommendation based on the severity, duration, and causes of the underperformance as the user describes them

[Describe the situation: the person, the performance issue, its duration, the likely causes, and the two approaches you are considering]
</task>

<output_format>
- Five sections matching the items above
- HR risk: named plainly, with reference to a formal performance improvement process as the likely next step
- Recommendation: direct, referencing the user's described severity and duration
- Tone: analytical, non-judgemental about the person, UK employment context assumed
</output_format>