Performance Reviews – Challenging the Status Quo
Written by John Sporleder
Few things bring me more satisfaction in my career as an HR professional than when I can take an old process and apply new and innovative approaches to make it better. Is it just me or do you notice that when we keep doing the same things year after year, not only do we lose sight of the original intent, but it becomes almost sacred to us and we find ourselves defending it as if it were something to be adored and revered. When that happens, you know it is long overdue for a process makeover.
One of the greatest challenges we face as HR professionals is what to do about the performance review process. Few processes have withstood the test of time like the performance review process. Under the facilitation of HR, managers complete forms, write comments, determine performance ratings that coincide with salary increases and sit down with employees to review the good and the bad.
Can this process be challenged? Is there a new and improved version that is out there that more effectively can transfer the necessary feedback from manager to employee? Well, I think the answer to this is yes and no. Employees need feedback and in many organizations, the performance review process is the formal means by which this is accomplished. It is fairly straight forward and we’re all used to it. So if it ain’t broken, why fix it?
In some ways, the process is broken and does need some fixing. Some organizations have done a good job of addressing this issue, but others may struggle more with what to change about it and how to do it. So let’s audit our performance review process and see if it is time to upgrade to a newer model.
What are your overall objectives you are trying to accomplish in your performance review process?
A good place to start is to ask yourself, what does my organization want to accomplish with our performance review process? Here are some guidelines to help you answer this question.
First, employee performance evaluations must be tied as closely as possible to business achievement. If most of your employees are getting “glowing” performance evaluations and the company is not meeting its business objectives, then your performance review process needs an overhaul.
Secondly, your performance review process must be an efficient way that managers can get clear, effective and accurate feedback to their employees. The manager must be able to clearly communicate his or her expectations of performance. That may be stating the obvious, but there are distractions and they must be minimized as much as possible. More on that later.
Thirdly, effectively communicating feedback is a core competency for a manager. Your performance review form and process must be a good facilitator to ensure this occurs.
Fourthly, performance review forms have a “shelf life.” Most forms are good for about 3 to 5 years. After that, they will begin to lose their luster. This is a challenge for the HR professional. Changing out a performance review form every 3 to 5 years may seem like a low priority on the HR projects list, but doing so can significantly increase the effectiveness of your process and be positively received by your managers.
Struggling with the traditional performance review
Many organizations give employees their performance review on their anniversary date. The managers may like this because it spreads the workload out over the year. But, giving performance reviews on anniversary dates make it harder to tie performance to the overall organization’s objectives. Business objectives and goals are probably done on an annual basis and most likely will follow the fiscal or calendar year. One of the best approaches to ensuring that performance review criteria is synchronized with the organization’s objectives is to move performance reviews to an annual cycle as well. For example, if strategic planning is done in Q4 and financial results are completed in Q1, then performance reviews could be scheduled for the beginning of Q2. Performance reviews can be designed to address the employee’s achievements as they relate to the organization’s achievements and goals can be established for the employee that tie in to the new business goals for the new year.
In my experience another issue with the traditional performance review process is that both managers and employees can struggle with the process and delay them or conduct them quickly or superficially. There are many reasons why this occurs. Sometimes it is related to a poor performance review form. Sometimes it is related to the process and other times it is related to the ability of a manager to give feedback and their concern for how the employee will receive it. Even though delays can happen, a manager must make every effort to ensure performance reviews are not delayed. Managers need to remember that feedback is an investment in their employees. When an employee receives an honest assessment, more times than not, they will appreciate it. If an employee’s performance gets worse after a manager’s honest assessment, it is time for another meeting to give them some more honest feedback!
Employees may say, “my manager doesn’t really know what I do. She doesn’t give me very good feedback!” This is a real problem especially in situations where a manager has multiple reports. But a manager will lose credibility with their employee if they aren’t careful about what they say in a review. A manager must be able to back up anything said in a performance review with examples.
The Salary Increase: To link it to the performance review or not – that is the question
I’m afraid this debate will go on long after I have rode off into the sunset. But, like everybody else, I have an opinion. Organizations that have adopted the Pay for Performance philosophy should always ensure the link between an employee’s performance and their pay. My opinion is that you can do this and still keep the performance review conversation separate from the salary increase conversation. I have found that when they happen at the same time, the employee hears what his or her increase is and then the rest sounds like, “blah blah blah!” Even if those two conversations are separated by a day, I believe it is better than having them at the same time. Remember one of the objectives of giving performance reviews is to provide a clear and effective method that gives employees feedback and communicates the manager’s expectations of performance – the less distractions, the better.
Tips for giving performance reviews
Even if you already have a good performance review process, here are a few tips for both the managers and the HR professionals to keep in mind.
For the managers:
- First and foremost, don’t wait for a performance review to give an employee feedback. A performance review should be a summary of what has already been discussed.
- Avoid non-work related issues. That can be a recipe for legal hot water.
- Focus on the employee’s talents and strengths and look for ways you can capitalize on their skills as you develop future goals and objectives for them.
- When identifying areas of improvement, provide concrete plans for them to work on that can be measured and assessed at a later date.
- Participate in communication and feedback training opportunities. There are always ways to improve our effectiveness as communicators.
- Don’t focus on the negatives! Don’t spend one minute praising them and then the next 59 minutes telling them what they did wrong. Make sure that you take the time to recognize and celebrate the things they do well.
- On the other hand, don’t give a poor performer a “good” performance review hoping that your nice approach will win them over to the good side of performance. Labor attorneys tell us that it is the Plaintiff’s performance reviews that work against a company’s defense in a lawsuit because the performance reviews are so positive. “How could you have terminated my client for poor performance when you gave him such glowing performance reviews?” Make sure poor performance is accurately described in their performance reviews.
For the HR professional:
- Keep the form and the process simple. You are facilitating the process more effectively with a simple and easy to use form and process.
- Keep a constant flow of good communication and feedback training programs going.
- Have a place on the performance review form where employees can make comments. That way, employees have a place to express their opinion of the review. This can help you see what issues remain outstanding with them and what you need to do to resolve them.
Changing things up with different approaches
Finally, remember the shelf life issue. It is good to change things up and take new approaches to giving performance feedback. A new approach will provide employees with input that they probably have not heard before or stated in a different way. This can be a very insightful moment for them. Here are some different types of review approaches that you can try if you have not yet done so. Keep in mind that they all have their pros and cons.
This is an approach where performance feedback is given by co-workers. Peer reviews can be very effective because an employee will no doubt receive multiple inputs about specific behaviors. Peer reviews can be done in groups or anonymously depending upon the approach that is more appropriate for your culture. Participants of a peer review must be willing to be candid and open about the individual’s performance. But be careful because peer reviews can be misused and will need oversight by the HR professional in order to be conducted effectively. Peer reviews should never be used as a replacement for the manager giving an employee direct feedback on specific performance issues.
Employees who have the opportunity to provide their own self-evaluation can be another effective approach if done correctly. This can be a relatively simple process to set up if there is already a good performance review form, the employee can easily fill it out for themselves. This approach can be effective because it can generate really good discussion between the employee and the manager. These discussions should be structured so that the employee and manager cover those areas of the employee’s performance where there is agreement of strengths and weaknesses and where there is disagreement. In the latter, good dialog can come when the objective of both the employee and the manager is to close the gaps between them. In self-assessments, it is important that the manager retain the responsibility of final outcomes. This approach will break down and become less effective if the manager allows the employee to dominate the conversation and the outcome.
This is the “all of the above” approach. 360 reviews can give an employee good feedback from many different perspectives, including direct reports, and it can be quite effective. Those employees that work directly for a manager know more about how to make him or her a better manager and that feedback can be extremely valuable feedback. Keep in mind that managers must make it safe for their employees to provide feedback. There must not be any repercussions for giving the feedback. If there is, it will break down the approach very quickly. Because many more people are involved in the review process, 360 reviews can be time consuming and require a lot more resources to administer. They must be carefully managed so that they do not become a time burden on the organization.
Changing your performance review process up and trying new approaches every few years can really increase the effectiveness of your performance review process. And, if you’re like me, you’ll get great satisfaction when you take on the status quo. And just maybe, your boss will reflect your good work in your performance review.
|
