The DOs and DON'Ts of Performance Reviews

Jan 07, 2020

By BJ Gallagher

Is in that location anyone in the workplace who has not undergone the torture of a performance review done badly? I'm sure we have all had to endure the torment of a well-intentioned only badly-executed performance appraisement—in which nosotros felt every bit if we were the ones existence executed! Blindfold, anyone? Got any terminal words before the verbal assault begins? I don't even fume but I'm tempted to enquire for a terminal cigarette!

Near performance review systems in most organizations are and so poorly designed and conducted that they really practise more harm than proficient. I oft tell my clients that they would exist ameliorate off doing nix rather than doing what they're currently doing! I'k not kidding.

Here are 10 common mistakes managers make, and tips for avoiding them. These are applied activity steps you tin can have to design and implement a system that will do what y'all want it to do—improve performance!

Error: The functioning review is a ane-way, top-downwardly procedure in which the dominate serves as gauge and jury of employees' behavior and achievements on the job.
Solution: Go far a ii-way procedure, at the very least. (If you really desire an effective review arrangement, design a 360-degree system that involves peer reviews as well equally a self-review.) The employee should have written a self-appraisal prior to the meeting with his or her boss—a written document comparable to what the boss is preparing. That way, both people in the coming together will be focused on the documentation of job performance, instead of the boss focusing on the employee. Remember: We do non evaluate people—we evaluate their results.

After a brief setting-the-tone introductory annotate or two by the boss, the employee should be invited to go over his or her self-appraisal first. This helps eliminate defensiveness and gets the meeting off to a good start by establishing that information technology is a dialogue, a two-manner conversation in which both parties tin share observations, perspectives, and comments almost job performance.

Y'all'll find that your top performers will commonly rate themselves lower than you practice. That's because they have high expectations for themselves—frequently higher than y'all accept for them. You'll discover that the opposite is also true: Your poorest performers will often rate themselves higher than you rate them. Whatever the state of affairs, talking nigh the gap betwixt your evaluation and theirs will be fruitful in getting you both on the same folio (both literally and figuratively) in terms of future expectations.

126790-wpb-5-ways-leaders-results

Mistake: The review process tries to serve as a coaching tool for employee evolution, as well equally a compensation tool to make up one's mind salary increases.
Solution: Your performance reviews should be done for either development OR for bounty—non both. If you lot're interested in coaching and development for improved results in the future, then unhook compensation from the process and focus only on the work itself. Conduct your performance review discussions equally far away as you tin from the time of yr when salary decisions are made.

If you're doing reviews in social club to make bacon decisions, that's fine—just exist clear that that's what you're doing. And so you tin behave your review conversations in the few weeks just earlier raises are appear.

The problem with trying to combine both employee development and compensation decisions in the same session is that employees are only going to pay attention to the coin—all the rest will go in one ear and out the other. You will get no coaching benefits from such a conversation. Employees will appear to be paying attention to what you're saying near their performance, just they're actually merely waiting to hear the magic number. Money talks—all else is lost.

Fault: The person doing the appraisal has little or no day-to-day contact with the employee whose performance is beingness judged.
Solution: This one is a no-brainer. The person having review conversations with an employee should be the supervisor or manager who has the most contact with that employee and is in the best position to accurately assess solar day-to-day results.

Mistake: Employees receive little or no accelerate notice of their "Judgment Day."
Solution: Performance discussions ideally should be conducted on a regular basis, on a schedule well-known and well-publicized to everyone in the organization.

Fault: Managers are vague in their feedback to employees. Or they assign capricious numerical "grades" with little or no substantiation.
Solution: Performance feedback needs to exist well documented in order to be effective. Hither's where it helps to take a good paper trail—documentation of both the adept results and the not-so-good results.

Don't rely on your memory in outlining how well the employee achieved his or her goals and met your expectations. (The homo retentivity is a mismatch detector and it will always do a good job of remembering the bad stuff, while forgetting the good stuff.) Proceed a file on each person who reports to y'all, and brand regular notes to yourself on beliefs and results as yous detect them—the adept, the bad, and yep, even the ugly. Encourage your employees to go along files for themselves, then that they, too, have documentation when they are writing their self-appraisals. Common documentation helps continue everyone'due south focus on the chore, not on the person.

Error: The review process tries to evaluate traits, rather than behaviors and results.
Solution: This is one of the most mutual mistakes I encounter on performance review forms—they try to evaluate personal traits, such as leadership, motivation, conscientiousness, attitude then on. The problem with traits is that they are internal and subjective— almost impossible to evaluate on a fair basis.

Instead of traits, keep your evaluation focused on two things: Behaviors and results. Behaviors are actions that you tin detect straight—she did the filing, he answered the phone, she chosen on customers, he repaired the machines, and and so on. Results are also observable: She achieved her sales quota, he reduced waste by 10%, she increased productivity by 10 amount, he completed his projects on time, and so on.

Mistake: The appraisement is a once-a-yr upshot that everyone tries to get through as rapidly equally they can, considering information technology'southward painful for bosses and employees alike.
Solution: The master goal in evaluating performance is to improve it. Therefore, you want to design a meaningful organization of coaching conversations that people welcome, find useful, and deem valuable. Employees demand regular feedback on how they're doing—what they're doing well and what needs improvement. Once a year just doesn't cut it. Pattern a simple, piece of cake to use system that encourages bosses and employees to engage in two-way conversations throughout the year—that'southward the only way you lot'll get any existent mileage out of a performance review organization.

Mistake: At that place is no investigation of causes that underlie employees' job performance issues.
Solution: People don't perform poorly for no reason. There are always causes—but yous'll never know what those causes are if you don't make the review process one of give and accept, support and coaching, with both parties focused on the aforementioned objective—doing the best job possible.

If an employee is performing poorly, enquire questions. Don't assume you know the reason—or spring to conclusions that he'south lazy, she's impaired, he's unmotivated, or she'south incompetent. Utilize your functioning review conversations as opportunities to find out what are the possible reasons for an employee's failure to meet standards and expectations. Hint: When an employee fails to perform adequately, the primary reason is frequently the boss'southward failure to motorbus!

Mistake: There is no follow-upwards activeness plan put in identify at the end of the performance appraisal.
Solution: The concluding thing to discuss in a operation review chat is "What next?" What steps does the employee demand to take to make certain that areas for improvement actually better? And what back up does the employee demand from you to brand that happen? An action programme is the perfect element to conclude an effective performance review discussion. Keep information technology elementary. Three or four next steps are just fine. Remember, this is the beginning of the next cycle in the coaching process. Keep information technology positive and applied.

Mistake: Any attempt at pay-for-performance is ineffective because the divergence in pay for a superlative performer and a mediocre performer is so small as to be meaningless.
Solution: Well-intentioned attempts at pay-for-performance often backfire because in that location is too little money bachelor OR direction is unwilling to make the difficult choices well-nigh giving big increases to summit performers and no increases to poor performers. So they try to offer a token of operation-based pay, which often backfires. The difference between a 3% increase and a 4% increase is meaningless in any real fiscal terms—and all it does is create jealousy, hurt feelings, and resentment amongst employees. My communication: If you tin can't come up upward with Existent money for REAL pay for operation, don't exercise it at all. You're better off giving everyone the same percentage increase.

Are you lot a new manager trying to learn the ropes on the chore? The AMA provides many resources to assist make the transition easier, including this webinar for new managers. Or continue your leadership grooming with our seminar on Preparing to Atomic number 82.

Related manufactures

  • Skills for Finer Coaching a Virtual Team
  • Operation Review Hooey
  • Get a People Builder: How to Maximize Employee Operation

Virtually the Writer(s)

BJ Gallagher is a Los Angeles workplace consultant, speaker, and writer of YES Lives in the Land of NO: A Tale of Triumph Over Negativity (Berrett-Koehler; 2006). You lot tin contact her at  or her web site, www.yeslivesinthelandofno.com.

Learn more about managing performance reviews with the AMA webinar:
Difficult Performance Reviews: How to Plow Painful Conversations into Positive Results