We’re introducing what might be a new feature at FOT – audacious ideas. Academics, consultants, vendors… come one, come all. Bring us your most audacious idea for what you think HR and recruiting practitioners need to be doing differently. And FOT readers? You be the judge. You’re in the trenches, so you weigh in on whether you think their crazy ideas are… crazy, or sheer brilliance. First one up to bat? FOT friend Todd Dewett.
Here is a radical proposition – job satisfaction at your company is mediocre, not because you’re doing the wrong things, but because you are not doing the right things correctly.
The truth is, job dissatisfaction is rapidly becoming an epidemic. And in an effort to turn around this trend, HR pros and leaders are looking for the latest and greatest trendy trick to turn the numbers around. But you? Please. Don’t get on that bandwagon. It’s not about doing new things after all. It’s about figuring out how to do a few of your core activities more logically. And you can start with your horrific employee evaluation process.
If you are among the rare few organizations with uber motivating evaluation systems – feel free to stop reading. For the other ninety-nine percent of you – keep reading. Unfortunately, the evaluation process in most organizations falls squarely into what I call “The Shoulda Skipped It Syndrome.” This refers to the many things individuals and organizations do with the best of intentions, yet which are executed so poorly that the intended positive outcome is replaced with a nasty negative outcome – thus, you think to yourself “We should have just skipped it.”
The goal of any evaluation process is to provide feedback to help employees understand and improve performance. It is supposed to provide them clarity and, dare I say it? Motivation! Don’t get me wrong though. Employee evaluations are the right thing to do. Trouble is, in reality, the vast majority of the time employees are more disenchanted after an evaluation than before the process began. Most employee evaluations are once or twice per year, and are delivered by folks untrained in providing performance-related feedback. And as a result? Oodles of time and money are spent on systematically undermining employee engagement when, in fact, the goal was just the opposite. Man oh man, we shoulda skipped it.
Which is why I am firmly in the camp that espouses blowing up your current performance evaluation process. It should be replaced with frequent, as needed, performance-related chats. Human memory is poor after all, so once or twice each year doesn’t cut it. That aside, people do not like being “evaluated.” They will respect being “helped” though.
So allow me to save you huge piles of cash and help you instantly realize massive increases in productivity and morale. Introduce simple one pagers to guide conversations and encourage frequent informal chats. Productivity will go up since your folks won’t be spending all those hours on evaluation-related paper work. Morale will rise as well since you’ve scrapped that onerous time-sucking process. And spend 1/10 of the money used to support the old evaluation process to train everyone thoroughly on the fundamentals of effective communication. I’m not joking. No slick piece of software or 360° evaluation will ever improve performance as well as a timely, honest performance chat between two professionals. You will not only transform the employee evaluation system for the better, but you will be increasing the quality of the average relationship in the organization at the same time. Morale up, retention up. You’re welcome.
Assessments and evaluations have grown into a monolithic documentation process due to the need of management / leadership to justify subsequent decisions and actions in case of litigation, or just plain political correctness. ‘Bravo’ Todd for standing up and pushing for two key action points, firstly – communication and secondly – simplification. Now Todd, you have a problem, the existing processes have been developed by HR people who want to keep there position and improve their status…simplified processes improve communication and reward motivation…
“And spend 1/10 of the money used to support the old evaluation process to train everyone thoroughly on the fundamentals of effective communication.”
hear, hear! performance management systems are not really the culprit. as you point out, it’s the lack of investment in equipping managers to perform the job. therefore, the system tries to stupid-proof the works with endless documentation and multi-point scales. by funneling money toward training managers, you equip them with the skill and capability to actually do what the system intended all along.
f
I’m on board and so is my President. But how do we train the managers to do it the right way?
Greer – a few quick thoughts:
1. Espouse what matters: the entire leadership team must be consistent in message and back it up with resources – put those two together and folks know you’re serious.
2. Model what matters: i.e., changing the status quo for evaluations; first make a well documented effort to cease the current practices (pics and video would be great for helping change the performance culture – hold a funeral, get creative); second, everyone in the leadership structure has to be held accountable for adopting the new behaviors. Leader modeled behaviors are stronger than any eval process for shaping the behaviors of others.
3. Train (and mentor / coach) on the fundamentals: I wasn’t kidding about communication 101. The importance of high quality real-time honest performance-related conversations cannot be overstated.
4. Train on the specifics: productive performance discussions must: be delivered at the right time, in the right physical space, by the right person; be framed constructively; be accompanied by helpful advice and / or resources. Missing one of the key elements can lead to conflict instead of a performance boost.
Good luck!
I’m probably the minority here, but I love performance reviews. Let me clarify that I think a “timely, honest performance chat between two professionals” is great, but it’s not enough. In fact, all those chats can have a negative effect. I have found that organizations that do not have a good review process (including one’s that rely on constant feedback) also have hard time recognizing top talent or firing dead weight.
For me, performance review time is the stake in the ground that tells employees exactly where they stand. You cannot do this through frequent, timely chats. I call that “coaching and feedback”. That should happen on a regular basis, but you are not being measured all the time. I am not sure how “frequent informal” conversations helps me see how I am progressing and what I need to do to get better?
Another issue with too frequent “performance conversations” is the inability to adequately recognize changes. Kinda like weighing yourself everyday when your on a diet.
My thought is, don’t throw it out yet. Partner with an easy to use online system, spend time training both your employees and managers how to set strong objectives at the beginning of the year, get/provide feedback throughout the year and have a kick ass evaluation at the end of the year. That’s what top performing companies out there are doing.
I agree with you 100% that you need a one page guideline with a true communicative exchange between the supervisor and the supervised. I’ve used this system in a small (okay, tiny) business for years.
I also tried to do this with the public school “grading” system, because I believe it has the same built in flaws. I told the teachers and administrators many times: “sit down with me and tell me where my child is doing well, and where they should improve. Give me suggestions on how to implement and help the my child with those improvements. Don’t give my child grades like “1, 2 ,3″ or “A,B,C” because they tell me nothing.
My kids are grown and gone now, but in all those years I could never get the schools to do this. I’m sure most big, impersonal companies won’t do it, either.
Sorry for that typo!
WOW! Well said. Our evaluation process is so time consuming and accomplishes much of nothing. I am all for scrapping the draining exercise and replacing it with a more meaningful coaching experience that should be conducted with employees as needed. The question is how do we influence a culture that is so reluctant to change?
I’m for performance management, but think it needs to be more human.
My audacious idea / belief is that, as much as possible, it should be based around peoples’ dreams vs organisational objectives:
http://strategic-hcm.blogspot.com/2008/04/innovation-in-performance-management.html
The fact is, studies show that organizations scrap their systems about every two years anyway, so the notion of scrapping is happening whether or not it’s tied to some rebellion.
My question is: Why are you evaluating performance? Why are “chatting” about it? I advise companies to get very clear on the “why” before they do anything to evaluate performance.
You should be measuring something, and that something should be something that MATTERS to the employee, the manager and to senior management.
I actually just released a white paper about how to turn your PM system into something that matters, and coincidentally, I believe the same thing: stop doing evaluations until you can turn them into something that matters to key stakeholders. It’s here, if anyone is interested: http://info.sonicrecruit.com/Default.aspx?app=LeadgenDownload&shortpath=docs%2fPM_recovering.pdf
Todd,
I also enjoyed reviews, when they were sincere. One company I worked for tried to do team evaluations where everyone holding the same position (project managers, estimators) would evaluate one another in front of the chief estimator and CEO. I thought it was a great idea, until it became apparent that I was the only one voicing my true opinion. Afterward, others admitted to “holding back” and I thought that totally undermined the process. I enjoy feedback, and think it’s necessary when starting a new job or position. Sincerity and honesty, to me, are the cornerstones of a valuable review.
- Jason Martin
Todd,
If a “review” is being done just for the sake of “rating” employees, it is likely of little value I agree. The key issue is “why are you doing reviews?” Now if the whole point of the process is to identify areas for development and put plans in place for that development – now we have a why. Now there is value for both the organization and the employee being developed. Add to that goal setting and alignment and you have a process that provides good value.
If nobody in the company knows why you do the process, you certainly have a problem. While I’m not sure the best solution is not to do the process at all, asking the question “why do we do this?” is certainly valuable.
These are many things that individuals and organizations dealing with the best intentions, but if poorly executed that the expected positive result is replaced by a negative.