Ugh, performance review time again?

What do you think of when you hear the term 'performance review'? Do you roll your eyes and think about all the time and effort wasted filling out the forms -- listing your achievements, listing your goals and objectives, conducting a self-assessment -- only to have that dreaded 30 minute meeting with your manager that then amounts to nothing?

If so, you are not alone. Having consulted with and worked for a number of companies throughout my career (and having developed several performance review programs), performance reviews usually follow the same set path. Set goals and objectives at the start of the year -- some realistic and some not (hey, make sure they are SMART!!), get no feedback for the next 11 months and them wham, bam--it's time to review your performance. Measuring yourself and being measured by your manager against those goals and objectives (and never mind whether or not you had any control over your ability to deliver as so many of them hinge on another team or department), filling out that darn self-assessment, recalling all of the achievements you had during the year (and how many roles actually have achievements worth noting?) and then leaving it all in the hands of your manager.

If you're lucky, your manager will indeed solicit feedback, will take the time and make the effort to fill out the forms and will meet with you. But what really comes of it? Is there a focus on your future? Do you get an understanding of how you can continue to learn and grow and develop in your role and beyond? Is there a focus on other opportunities within the company? Do you understand your career path and options? And all this is supposing you have a diligent manager. So many do not. The form may be completed by your manager at the last minute -- with or without the input of people with whom you've worked. It's unlikely there will be a real conversation about your aspirations and what opportunities exist within the team, department or company as a whole.

Everyone is just too darn busy or too focused on themselves or just not in tune with what is happening outside their little world to think about helping you advance your career. Your manager may not have a handle on what other opportunities or advancement there are for you in the company. If it's like most companies, the seniors in each of the departments are not aware of staff in other areas of the company and who might be right for movement or advancement. Heck many managers are not even qualified to coach, manage, guide or advocate on your behalf.

So, what's the answer? Many companies today are taking different approaches to evaluating employee performance - some doing away with it altogether. Feedback might be given at the end of a project or completion of a deal. It might be given on a regular, informal basis. Some have stuck with the traditional performance review but streamlined it a bit. Performance reviews have taken some radical forms as well.

Deloitte revamped its process in 2015 after learning it spent nearly 2 million hours a year on its review process. Adobe calculated that is 2,000 managers were investing 80,000 hours into performance reviews -- that's 40 hours for each manager spent on reviews!! Accenture got rid of their ratings altogether and brought in a new system -- no longer tying a rating to salary and bonus.

Facebook has implemented a novel approach. They have kept the formal review process and ratings are directly tied to pay. There's a self-evaluation and then the employee nominates 3-5 peers to review them. Managers write up the review and come up with a rating by comparing evaluations for employees in similar roles and levels to normalize people who may be hard or easy graders. Managers have no control over compensation and there's a predetermined sum associated with each rating. PwC has also stuck with a rating system (based on five qualities and a scale of 1-5) but they do so on a rolling basis -- meaning whenever employees request it through a company-wide app. It gives employees a quick overview of how they are doing and they can compare results of past evaluations to the current one.

The trend seems to be getting peers more involved in the evaluation process. After all, these are the people who are working most closely with other staff and are in a good position to provide construction feedback. There's no right or wrong way to conduct performance reviews. No matter what form your evaluations take, the most important aspect is ensuring that feedback (either formal or informal) is meaningful and regular. It makes no sense to provide feedback once a year -- months after completion of the assignment or project. A larger emphasis needs to be put on developing the careers of employees and ensuring transparency on the types of roles and increased responsibility they can undertake.

What is your performance review process like at your company? If you don't want to share it here, please email me at [email protected]

I'd welcome your insight and love to hear what other companies are doing.