Rethink Performance Management
It's time to rethink performance management!
Successful performance engagement is about creating a cultural shift in how people view the appraisal process. Moving from performance management to performance engagement requires managers to think of themselves as a coach, not as an umpire.
I won't beat around the bush. Most everyone sees TRADITIONAL performance management as enemy number one. Only 2 in 10 employees say their performance is managed in a way that motivates them to do outstanding work. Only 14% of employees surveyed find value in their performance reviews.
The vast majority of employees find no value in the traditional performance review according to a Gallup survey.
But before you throw the baby out with the bathwater allow me the opportunity to pitch you on reforming the review as most of you know it.
Annual reviews have been with us for decades and they evolved from paper forms to the sophisticated paperless systems of today.
Despite their journey over time into the 21st century their baggage and reputation for being adversarial, inaccurate, and single minded came along for the ride. Not a good foundation for promoting employee engagement which has become the bellwether for producing competitive advantage. Hey how about that threadbare refrain "Our employees are our greatest asset'?
The time is long overdue for the review process to undergo a face lift and move it to the front of the line. No more apologies for conducting reviews. No other single process has the data and potential to improve performance and the bottom line, reward and recognize employee contributions, transform strategy into results by putting company goals in line with your own and your employees' goals, foster leadership development and coaching, and cultivate and manage new skills and succession planning.
Yet one ponders why this process that can do so much good for so many has fallen from favor? Can the tired and rejected review be easily refreshed and sent back on the field and score a home run? The answer is an unequivocal yes.
How do you take the review from an adversarial, inaccurate, and non-constructive process to a powerful communication and engagement tool. It's sounds like 'putting lipstick on the pig'.
Let's break it down. Review inaccuracy is a recurring criticism. You wouldn't try to balance your checkbook once a year yet we treat reviews like an annual tax return. If you want to raise the engagement and accuracy bar, start increasing the review cycles. How about quarterly, or at the very least biannual reviews? A single review in 12 months is grossly inadequate for promoting engagement, accuracy, and performance improvement.
And while on the accuracy rant, I would be remiss if I didn't raise the "subjectivity alert".
The two primary reasons for subjective leaning appraisals are infrequent reviews and a disproportionate number of subjective behavior competencies. These two factors tend to foster an adversarial element to the process and can be mitigated by more frequent reviews and more metric based performance objectives.
Micro or mini reviews are a breeze and the preferred best practice, but only if using automated systems. Paper based reviews are an administrative nightmare if done just once a year so if you don't want to be tarred and feathered don't even think of suggesting micro reviews unless using an automated system.
Regrettably old habits die hard. Organizations view automated reviews as a panacea and when the switch is flipped from paper to an automated system the organization returns to their old ineffective and outdated once a year practice and then they wonder why everyone hasn't fallen head over heels in love for the new system.
Automating a bad once a year review practice gives you the same failed results of late inaccurate reviews but just without all the paper, copying, printing and filing.
There is no good reason not to have more performance feedback and more review meetings, and these are the bedrock for employee engagement. Oh by the way; stress reduction and increased coaching and trust building are the byproducts of micro reviews.
Exchanging the once a year one hour review for several ten or fifteen minute micro reviews is a win win. Regular feedback is fresher and can be acted upon immediately. A good coach doesn't wait until the end of the game to provide feedback and coaching to the players. A good coach wants his players to improve their performance immediately, not next game or next week.
Reviews sans discussions about goal metrics and learning opportunities lack the substance needed to transform the review into a building block on which to raise the performance bar. That's part of the underlying complaint as to why reviews aren't improving performance.
Micro reviews provide ongoing feedback. They put a kibosh to blindsiding an employee with negative feedback; which regrettably is unforgivable and unnecessary because it shreds any trust an employee has in their manager and the process.
The Review of Tomorrow Starts Today
Creating a culture in which everyone sees reviews as an engagement opportunity between manager and employee to collaborate and create new challenges is best achieved by providing constructive coaching and bi-directional feedback, (managers should ask employees for their honest feedback as well). These frequent sessions provide opportunities for manager and employee to fine tune personal development plans, and recognize contributions.
Both manager and employee will feel a more positive attitude about the review and actually look forward to participating in these pit stop meetings to discuss new ideas, about performance improvement.
Employees want and need job clarity and priorities, ongoing feedback and communication, opportunities to learn and grow and this may surprise you, they want accountability. Implementing a performance management process that fosters best practices is the premiere approach for improving performance and improving engagement.
The most important magic dust to be sprinkled over the process rests with the manager. He or she must have the courage to invoke an atmosphere of radical transparency and have the emotional maturity to welcome candid disagreement. Managers may need coaching themselves to achieve this leadership quality.
Great leaders welcome thoughtful disagreement and are able to rise above it because it sparks curiosity and an opportunity for them to learn and grow. They know that in any disagreement someone must be wrong and it might just be yourself.
Going from performance management to performance engagement is easier than you think if you follow these common sense guidelines.
Every employee should be able to tell you how his or her performance is assessed but unfortunately less than 50 percent of today's information employees can do this.
Is is disheartening that Gallup surveys revealed:
- 30% of employees strongly agree that their manager involves them in goal setting
- 27% strongly agree the feedback they receive helps them do their work better
- 22% strongly agree their performance is managed in away that motivates them
- 19% strongly agree that they talked to their manager about steps to reach their goals -See my article Goals - Profit - Pay for Performance
The above is a broad cultural framework to get your organization headed in the right direction. There are other practices that may need to be adopted and others discarded and I would be happy to discuss them with you, so feel free to reach out and connect.
For more insight into Performance Management
Performance Appraisals - A Bad Concept or Bad Practices
Rethink Performance Management
It's Time to Take Performance Management Out of the Penalty Box
IFP's Employee Engagement Program
- Hire and Develop the Right People and Place Them in the Right Jobs
- Identify Hire and Promote Tomorrow's Leaders
INSIGHTS FOR PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS
Insights For Performance HR Solutions
6 年Thanks Tim