The DOs and DON'Ts of Operation Reviews

Jan 07, 2020

By BJ Gallagher

Is there anyone in the workplace who has not undergone the torture of a performance review washed badly? I'thousand certain we have all had to endure the torment of a well-intentioned just desperately-executed operation appraisal—in which nosotros felt equally if we were the ones beingness executed! Blindfold, anyone? Got any last words before the exact assault begins? I don't fifty-fifty smoke but I'm tempted to ask for a last cigarette!

Virtually functioning review systems in most organizations are and so poorly designed and conducted that they actually practise more than harm than good. I oft tell my clients that they would be better off doing nothing rather than doing what they're currently doing! I'm not kidding.

Here are x mutual mistakes managers make, and tips for avoiding them. These are practical action steps y'all tin can have to design and implement a system that will exercise what you want it to practice—improve performance!

Mistake: The performance review is a ane-way, superlative-down process in which the boss serves equally approximate and jury of employees' beliefs and achievements on the job.
Solution: Get in a ii-way process, at the very least. (If you really want an constructive review system, design a 360-degree system that involves peer reviews as well as 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 meeting will be focused on the documentation of task performance, instead of the boss focusing on the employee. Remember: Nosotros do not evaluate people—we evaluate their results.

After a brief setting-the-tone introductory comment or two past the boss, the employee should be invited to go over his or her self-appraisal kickoff. This helps eliminate defensiveness and gets the meeting off to a good offset by establishing that it is a dialogue, a two-style conversation in which both parties can share observations, perspectives, and comments about job performance.

You lot'll find that your top performers volition normally rate themselves lower than you exercise. That's because they accept high expectations for themselves—often higher than yous take for them. You'll discover that the opposite is also true: Your poorest performers volition frequently charge per unit themselves higher than you rate them. Whatever the state of affairs, talking almost the gap between your evaluation and theirs will be fruitful in getting you both on the same page (both literally and figuratively) in terms of futurity expectations.

126790-wpb-5-ways-leaders-results

Error: The review process tries to serve every bit a coaching tool for employee evolution, equally well as a compensation tool to make up one's mind bacon increases.
Solution: Your performance reviews should be washed for either development OR for compensation—not both. If you lot're interested in coaching and evolution for improved results in the future, and then unhook compensation from the procedure and focus just on the piece of work itself. Comport your operation review discussions equally far abroad as y'all can from the time of yr when bacon decisions are made.

If y'all're doing reviews in order to brand salary decisions, that'southward fine—just be clear that that'south what you lot're doing. Then you lot can behave your review conversations in the few weeks simply before raises are announced.

The trouble with trying to combine both employee development and bounty decisions in the same session is that employees are only going to pay attention to the money—all the residual will go in ane ear and out the other. You will get no coaching benefits from such a conversation. Employees will appear to exist paying attention to what you're saying most their operation, only they're really simply waiting to hear the magic number. Money talks—all else is lost.

Mistake: The person doing the appraisement has petty or no 24-hour interval-to-twenty-four hours contact with the employee whose functioning is existence judged.
Solution: This one is a no-brainer. The person having review conversations with an employee should be the supervisor or director who has the most contact with that employee and is in the best position to accurately assess day-to-day results.

Mistake: Employees receive picayune or no advance detect of their "Judgment 24-hour interval."
Solution: Performance discussions ideally should be conducted on a regular ground, on a schedule well-known and well-publicized to anybody in the organization.

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

Don't rely on your memory in outlining how well the employee accomplished his or her goals and met your expectations. (The human memory is a mismatch detector and it will always exercise a practiced task of remembering the bad stuff, while forgetting the adept stuff.) Go on a file on each person who reports to you lot, and make regular notes to yourself on behavior and results as yous observe them—the good, the bad, and yes, fifty-fifty the ugly. Encourage your employees to keep files for themselves, so that they, as well, accept documentation when they are writing their self-appraisals. Mutual documentation helps keep everyone's focus on the task, non on the person.

Fault: The review process tries to evaluate traits, rather than behaviors and results.
Solution: This is 1 of the nearly mutual mistakes I see on performance review forms—they endeavour to evaluate personal traits, such as leadership, motivation, conscientiousness, attitude and so on. The problem with traits is that they are internal and subjective— most 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 can observe directly—she did the filing, he answered the phone, she called on customers, he repaired the machines, and so on. Results are also appreciable: She achieved her sales quota, he reduced waste material by X%, she increased productivity past X corporeality, he completed his projects on time, and then on.

Mistake: The appraisal is a once-a-year issue that everyone tries to go through as speedily as they can, because it's painful for bosses and employees akin.
Solution: The primary goal in evaluating functioning is to improve it. Therefore, you want to design a meaningful organisation of coaching conversations that people welcome, find useful, and deem valuable. Employees need regular feedback on how they're doing—what they're doing well and what needs comeback. One time a year merely doesn't cutting it. Design a simple, easy to utilise system that encourages bosses and employees to engage in ii-style conversations throughout the year—that's the but way you'll get whatsoever real mileage out of a performance review organization.

Mistake: In that location is no investigation of causes that underlie employees' job operation bug.
Solution: People don't perform poorly for no reason. There are always causes—simply you'll never know what those causes are if you don't brand the review process i of give and take, support and coaching, with both parties focused on the same objective—doing the best job possible.

If an employee is performing poorly, inquire questions. Don't assume you know the reason—or spring to conclusions that he's lazy, she's dumb, he's unmotivated, or she'due south incompetent. Utilize your performance review conversations every bit opportunities to find out what are the possible reasons for an employee'south failure to come across standards and expectations. Hint: When an employee fails to perform adequately, the master reason is oft the dominate'southward failure to double-decker!

Mistake: In that location is no follow-upwards activeness plan put in identify at the terminate of the operation appraisal.
Solution: The last thing to hash out in a performance review chat is "What next?" What steps does the employee need to take to make sure that areas for improvement actually improve? And what back up does the employee demand from you to brand that happen? An activity plan is the perfect element to conclude an constructive performance review discussion. Keep it elementary. Three or four next steps are just fine. Remember, this is the beginning of the side by side cycle in the coaching process. Proceed it positive and practical.

Mistake: Any attempt at pay-for-performance is ineffective because the difference in pay for a top performer and a mediocre performer is so small-scale equally to be meaningless.
Solution: Well-intentioned attempts at pay-for-performance often backfire considering in that location is too lilliputian money available OR direction is unwilling to brand the hard choices virtually giving big increases to top performers and no increases to poor performers. So they try to offer a token of performance-based pay, which often backfires. The divergence between a 3% increase and a 4% increment is meaningless in whatever real fiscal terms—and all information technology does is create jealousy, hurt feelings, and resentment amongst employees. My communication: If you tin can't come up up with REAL coin for Existent pay for performance, don't do it at all. You lot're ameliorate off giving everyone the same percent increase.

Are y'all a new managing director trying to learn the ropes on the job? The AMA provides many resources to help make the transition easier, including this webinar for new managers. Or go along your leadership training with our seminar on Preparing to Pb.

Related articles

  • Skills for Effectively Coaching a Virtual Squad
  • Performance Review Hooey
  • Become a People Builder: How to Maximize Employee Performance

About the Author(s)

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

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