How to prepare an employee conversation with facts, not impressions

An employee conversation is prepared with dated facts: what was agreed, the training completed, the successes and difficulties observed. Clearly separate the fact, your opinion and the decision, then prepare questions rather than a verdict. The conversation stays human: software can gather the facts, but it never judges the person.

An improvised conversation on Saturday after service

A manager sits down with a cook at 3pm, between two services. They want to talk about his lateness. They have three or four episodes in mind, but are unsure of the dates. The cook replies that he gave notice last time and that his schedule had been changed without his knowing. The manager has nothing to answer with. The exchange turns into an argument from memory, then into tension.

The problem is not the cook. The manager arrived with an impression and nothing to check it against. They also did not remember that praise had been given a month earlier, or that a training commitment had not been kept.

What makes these conversations unfair

The manager's memory is selective. It holds on to the last incident and recent events, not the successes from three months ago.

Previous commitments are lost. What was promised (a training, a change of station) is written nowhere, so the employee feels a lot is asked of them and little is delivered.

Fact and opinion are mixed. "You're often late" contains a fact (times), a judgment ("often") and a generalization about the person.

Organizational causes are ignored. A poorly passed-on instruction, a late schedule change, a missing training: all of these produce gaps that are not the employee's doing.

The prep sheet, in three columns

Fact (dated, verifiable)	My opinion	What I want to understand or propose
On the cold station the last three Saturdays, no dish sent back	Becoming more independent on this station	Offer to have him train the next hire on this station
Allergen training planned for September, not completed	Delay due to the organization	Set a date, check availability
Two arrivals after the scheduled time, one after a late schedule change	To look at with him	How to give notice of schedule changes

This sheet is filled in before the conversation and can be shown to the employee if the discussion calls for it. An opinion that rests on no fact stays off the sheet.

Preparing the conversation in six steps

1. Reread the previous conversation

What was agreed, who was to do what, by when? Each commitment is marked kept, not kept, or to revisit, with the cause when it is known.

2. Gather the facts for the period

Training signed off, tasks signed, incidents and what followed, notable successes, agreed absences. Format: a dated history. A manager who has to reconstruct everything from memory will do it badly.

3. Look at the organization first

For each difficulty, ask whether the procedure, the training or the schedule contributed. Look at the process before the person.

4. Separate fact, opinion and decision

Write them down on the sheet. During the conversation, say: "Here is what I noted," "here is what I make of it," "here is what I propose."

5. Prepare five open questions

"What helped you this period?", "What was missing?", "What would you like to learn?" The conversation decides more than the sheet does.

6. Write the next steps, with a date and an owner

At the end, note what was agreed and share it with the employee. This text will be the basis of the next conversation.

After the conversation

Reread the commitments note with the employee in the following days, to correct anything misunderstood. Then put the review date in your calendar. A conversation whose follow-ups are never reread mostly teaches that these meetings are pointless.

Common mistakes

• Arriving with a judgment already formed and looking for the facts that confirm it.
• Mentioning successes only at the end, out of politeness.
• Taking an isolated fact for a character trait.
• Keeping notes the employee has never seen.
• Letting a tool produce a note or a score that stands in for a decision.

What to measure

• The share of conversation commitments kept by the planned date, on the manager's side and the employee's.
• The number of conversations where all the facts were available before starting.
• The manager's prep time. It should fall once the facts are already gathered.

Where Tsuno comes in

Tsuno prepares the conversation on the facts: previous commitments, training and expected skills, signed tasks, incidents and actions, dated, each with its provenance. It points out when a piece of data is missing. That is all: it does not grade the person, does not infer motivation or mood, does not predict a departure and never recommends a sanction. Tsuno connects the facts; the manager leads the conversation and decides. See the trust page.

Further reading

Goals set in these conversations have their own pitfalls, covered in restaurant employee goals: why they often fail. On the limits of a tool when it comes to people, read software recalls the facts, people decide: a doctrine for AI in HR. To decide when a new hire is ready, how to know when a new restaurant employee is actually ready. All of this fits within managers do not need another dashboard.

Key takeaways

A fair conversation starts with rereading commitments and dated facts, and distinguishing fact, opinion and decision. The organization is examined before the person. A tool can prepare the material, never draw the conclusion.