Getting value from performance reviews
 |
|
Unfortunately, most traditional reviews put managers into the position of uncomfortable judges, ostensibly telling employees how their work is, or is not, satisfactory.
Because of these problems, new types of reviews are coming into play. Most require that evaluations be done not for raises, promotions, or bonuses, but for growth, development, and communication.
Some people would say that performance reviews are the most dreaded of all management practices. Whenever the subject comes up, out come the groans. Sure, everyone wants the feedback, but the thought of filling out all those forms or enduring endless meetings is something no one relishes.
And to top it off, Human Resources departments seem to be continually tweaking the process, often trading in the old system for a new one at great cost in terms of time and money.
No one is ever sure as to what the benefits to the company are, but everyone sure takes these reviews seriously!
Many management consultants now say that traditional evaluation methods damage teamwork because of the focus on supervisors evaluating individuals.
A more desirable approach is where evaluations provide feedback to individuals so problems can be corrected and higher performance can be rewarded.
In the conventional annual performance appraisal or review process, the manager annually writes his or her opinions of the performance of a staff member. This exercise is completed on a document supplied by the HR department.
In some organisations, the staff member is asked to fill out a self-review to share with the supervisor.
Most of the time, the appraisal reflects what the manager can remember. Almost automatically there is an over emphasis on recent events and not an even coverage of the whole year.
Typically, the appraisal is based on opinions as real performance measurement takes time and follow-up to do well. The documents in use in many organisations also ask the supervisor to make judgments based on concepts and words such as excellent performance (what's that?), exhibits enthusiasm (hmmm, laughs a lot?) and achievement oriented (likes to score?).
Many managers are uncomfortable in the role of judge, so uncomfortable, in fact, that performance appraisals are often months overdue. The HR professional, who manages the appraisal system, finds his most important roles are to develop the form and maintain an employee official file, notify supervisors of due dates, and then nag, nag, nag when the review is long overdue.
Because performance reviews can be highly emotional, especially for the employee, it is best for managers to approach a review with a specific agenda in mind. They should plan in advance what they are going to say during each part of the review and make certain they deliver the message they want to get across.
Probably only the annual budgeting process comes even close to having the same effect on people as the performance appraisal.
If you visit a company that has set up all its annual reviews on the same date, you'll see lots of closed doors and frantic people.
A companywide blood-pressure index would show a huge spike, as managers try to remember George's accomplishments, Debbie's need for improvement, Silvia's highest-impact deliverables, and what the heck Wayne has been doing all year, anyway.