By Carol Anderson, Featured Contributor
Performance evaluation in corporate America – the dreaded, ineffective leadership responsibility that few ever do well.
The concept is actually good….provide expectations for performance, feedback on work accomplished, and develop skills for the future. How can we argue with that? Why is it so gosh darned difficult to do it well?
I have new insight, based on a recent experience of my own. Let me explain.
I really like a certain kind of jewelry, but I had trouble finding what I was looking for, so I decided to take a class and learn to make it. I found out I enjoyed the creativity of the design, as well as the technical and detailed work involved. When I was focusing on the design and creation, my brain was unable to think about work, and this is a good thing.
I found that I was actually pretty good, and got very positive feedback from friends and family. I was having so much fun, I was overrun with finished pieces, so I put several up for sale with a lovely art shop in St. Augustine FL – right on the tourist path. That was yesterday.
It wasn’t until a couple people passed my display while I was still putting pieces up, that it hit me. People may not like my work! I mentioned that to the store owner who promptly told me, “oh, you’ve got to get over worrying about that.”
Artists, writers and performers put themselves “out there” on a regular basis, and realize that they may receive feedback that is brutally negative or wonderfully positive. They then have to make some decisions about the feedback. They may decide that
- The feedback is valid helpful and making a change may improve future performances, or
- The feedback is not helpful, that the critic either missed a point or just plain didn’t like it, and making a change is not in the cards.
Perhaps there are a couple lessons from the arts that we, in corporate America, could find helpful in making our performance management programs more effective.
Lesson One
Don’t make it personal or take it personally. Sometimes there actually is a personal element, but don’t let it get you. Look for the possible validity and help, or not, within the feedback and make a decision about how to receive it. But it is about the performance and not the person.
Lesson Two
Employees need to have the skill for and freedom to receive performance feedback and engage in open dialogue. Employees may not have the luxury (as a performer does) of rejecting the feedback, but they need to trust the giver of the feedback and talk openly about change and consequences.
Lesson Three
Leaders need to be trusted to provide feedback. They should know how to source objective information to support feedback, to offer observations in such a way that helps the employee see the “why”, to offer the feedback in such a way that it is not personal, and to create an open dialogue based on performance and development rather than on judgment.
Lesson Four
Leaders need to be accountable for improving the performance of their teams, and for developing the skill and competence of their workforce.
Lesson Five
The performance management process in an organization should be designed to be as objective as possible, providing for solid performance data, employee involvement and contribution, and oversight to ensure that the process is working to actually improve performance.
Thankfully, we in corporate America are not subject to brutal negative feedback (at least as individuals) that performers experience. However in the spirit of improving and growing, feedback is a critical element, and we need to learn how to communicate effectively with feedback.
Hi Jane – thanks for your comment. I love having your perspective here, because if the performance management program isn’t doing anything to help you, it is clearly missing the boat. But you’re not alone – most performance review programs miss the boat because of exactly what you said…keep all the notes in the head or the drawer until the end of the year, and then spend an hour writing and an hour delivering feedback that is neither timely nor helpful. After almost 40 years of designing these programs, I’m reluctantly coming to the conclusion that we need to scrap it all and start over. Or…we could develop those in leadership positions to do what you describe –
My favorite of your points is Lesson Four. Leaders need to be accountable for improving the performance of their teams, and for developing the skill and competence of their workforce. As an employee I have never been a fan of the performance review. I won’t debate it, although I will share the same perspective I’ve written as comments on many other threads. Feedback is vital. It’s important. It should not be confined to the performance review.
If this is a primary objective of the performance review, there is merit in it. I have not witnessed that as an outcome of performance reviews. It isn’t that I’ve had poor reviews. The point is that I have never seen the review process achieve anything other than to divvy up the funds available for raises. That could be accomplished without the annual review.
Reviews should be done on the spot. If I’m doing something wrong or unproductive, the time to point it out is as soon as the fault is recognized. If I’m a good employee I’m not going to take it personally when you explain that there is a better way to do something or that I need to do more research. I am going to be relieved that I now have an opportunity to learn and improve skill. There is little value in mid-point and annual reviews. Feedback is too late by then. The value of feedback is in discovery and correction. The sooner, the better.
Getting back to the team though. If you, as a manager, are trying to develop the competence and skill of the team members and therefore the team, I’m struggling to understand how the performance evaluation factors in. Identifying strengths is done by observing, through interactions, in status reports, and personal contact.