How to Conduct A Successful Performance Review
I recently participated in a Board meeting in which senior management explained that while there was only one formal, annual performance review, employees regularly received feedback and reviewed their objectives on a regular basis. I have heard similar claims for many years. While we can all agree that employees receive feedback in a variety of ways on a regular basis, a pat on the back, a "job well-done," or a "that wasn't right" hardly help people understand how they are viewed by their managers or how they can advance their careers.
Unfortunately, too many organizations support a process of this nature because there are few things that managers seem to enjoy less than giving people useful and specific feedback. Thus, while virtually everyone values performance feedback and much has been written about how important it is, many managers struggle to find an appropriate balance between focused feedback and more casual comments. Also, for many less experienced managers it's difficult to give candid feedback which distinguishes between strengths and weaknesses.
Generally, managers understand that there are three basic reasons for appraising employee performance:
To encourage good behavior or to correct and discourage below-standard performance. Good performers expect a reward, even if it is only praise. Poor performers should recognize that continued substandard behavior will at the very least stand in the way of advancement. At the most drastic, it may lead to termination.
To satisfy employee's curiosity about how well they are doing. It is a fundamental drive in human nature for each of us to want to know how well we fit into the organization for which we work. An employee may dislike being judged, but the urge to know is very strong.
To provide a firm foundation for later judgments that concern an employee's career -- pay raises, promotions, transfers, or separation. It is a cardinal mistake, however, to focus too much on the relationship of pay raises during the appraisal process. It is only human for people who have been told their work is good to expect an increase in pay to follow.
Performance rating is so often associated with money that supervisors and employees alike lose sight of the other important benefits of regular, organized feedback. Periodic performance reviews (quarterly or thrice annually) help a supervisor to:
Point out strengths and weaknesses to employees so that they can cultivate the former and correct the latter.
Provide a fair and unbiased method for determining qualifications for promotions, transfers, and special assignments.
Recognize those employees who have exceptional ability and deserve training for higher positions and responsibilities.
Weed out those who aren't qualified for the work they are now doing and help assign them to more suitable work. Or, if they are wholly unqualified, separate them from the property's payroll.
Perhaps most importantly, because employees typically only get a raise once a year, having more than one performance review makes it immediately clear that a discussion about pay will not be a topic with each performance conversation, thus facilitating a genuine focus on performance rather than on pay.
An effective appraisal process of course involves both quantitative and qualitative feedback. Qualitative feedback requires the manager to decide on the various rating factors considered. It is also designed to precipitate some thought each time the appraisal is conducted as to what specific weakness(es) should be strengthened. More importantly, the supervisor should establish, with the employee, specific responsibilities to be emphasized at the next appraisal. This pre-planning then gives both parties ample opportunity to work on those skills that need upgrading.
A good performance rating includes more than just a supervisor's opinion. It should be based on facts, too. A Performance Appraisal Checklist, or similar tool helps ensure that an opinion is based on some measure of objectivity. People like to know how they are doing and are generally eager to hear feedback as long as they perceive that the evaluation is fair and constructive. Discussions of ratings with an employee will:
Give the employee a clear understanding of how well the manager thinks the job is being done.
Provide the employee with a chance to ask questions about the manager's opinion and give views on his or her own effort.
Clear up any misunderstanding about what the manager expects from the employee on the job.
Set a course for the employee to improve attitudes and job skills.
Build a strong relationship based on mutual confidence between supervisor and employee.
Knowledge of where an individual stands with the boss is every bit as important to a top-notch performer as it is to a mediocre employee – maybe even more so. If a manager fails to show any recognition of a good job, an employee is likely to feel, "What's the use of doing a good job? No one appreciates it."
But one should not let a discussion with the employee being rated take on the nature of an end-of-term school report. Mature adults resist this. Subordinates can easily regard the performance appraisal as just another way for the organization to increase its control over them if this attitude prevails. And guidance for poor performers should incorporate these characteristics: Be firm; nothing is to be gained by being soft. If work has been bad, say so. And be specific. Don't rub it in, though. Leave the employee's self-respect. It's very important to be able to distinguish between "this was not well done," without suggesting "everything was done poorly." Practically speaking, it's no different from a parent being able to say to a child "that was stupid" rather than saying "you're stupid." Ending the discussion by summarizing what is satisfactory is just as important as noting what is unsatisfactory.
Give employees every chance to explain the obstacles that stand in the way of their doing well. Don't interrupt or say, "That's just an excuse." Instead, be patient. Let the person talk. Often, the first reason given isn't the real one. Only careful listening will help a manager discover underlying causes for poor attitude or effort.
Confidence in the manager and in the performance rating system is important. One shouldn't be too anxious to prove that an employee is wrong. Above all, it is never useful to show anger, regardless of what kind of remark the employee makes. That advice goes even if the employee becomes angry. There is always the employee who does not respond positively to any approach regarding improvement. Yes, there really is "that 10%." However, one cannot overlook the following possibilities for continued poor performance:
Individuals may be assigned to work that does not match their capabilities. It may be too easy or too difficult. One solution is a transfer to a more suitable job. Or the job might be redesigned to give the employee a better fit.
Employees may not have received proper training. In any case of continued poor performance, the manager should first re-examine the employee's training and find a way to review the job procedure with the employee from start to finish.
Individuals may be victims of pressures from the work group. An employee may be trying to conform to job standards, but co-workers may be giving him or her a hard time. This can happen especially if there is a radical change in management style. To correct this situation, you may need to approach it from the group's point of view to change or modify their position.
There is always the possibility, too, that there is some hitch in the operating process.
Appraisal interviews should be conducted in an office or in a private room. Both participants should be able to give the conversation their undivided attention in a location where other employees will not be likely to hear.
In summary, use these seven steps to handle the appraisal interview itself:
Both manager and employee should be prepared and come to the meeting expecting to compare notes. That way, there are facts at hand and the employee has the same opportunity to recollect about performance during the previous period.
Compare accomplishments with specific targets. Don't be vague or resort to generalizations. For example, it is specific to say an employee was late seven times. "You don't care about being on time" is based on inappropriate assumptions and is too vague. Managers should be specific about what was expected and how close the employee has come to meeting these expectations.
It's important to give adequate credit for what has been accomplished. It is a temptation to take for granted those things that have been done well and to concentrate on the deficiencies. This is a key challenge with appraisals, the sense that one must point out the shortcomings and that any acknowledgement of success will diminish the value of the overall critique.
Review those things that have not been accomplished. Emphasize where improvement is needed. And explore together with the employee how this can be done and why it is necessary for the employee to improve.
Avoid the impression of sitting in judgement. If there is blame to be shared amongst team members or the larger organization, acknowledge it. Never compare the employee with a third person. Stick to a mutual explanation of the facts and what they imply to both.
The manager and employee should agree on targets to be met during the period ahead and be specific about them. They should also relate to what has not been accomplished during the current period. This sets the stage for a more objective appraisal discussion next time around.
The manager should review what can be done to be of greater help. Improvement is almost always a mutually dependent activity. An employee who knows that her manager shares responsibility will approach the task with greater confidence and enthusiasm.
An effective performance appraisal process contributes to organizational alignment by tying individual performance to organizational goals. By connecting the goals to individual performance, employees can better understand how their work contributes to the company. This ensures that employees' efforts are directed towards achieving key priorities, and driving business success.
Originally Published in Hotel Business Review - Hotel Executive
