Friday, June 27, 2008

Ten Tips to Maximize Your Performance Appraisal Documentation Skills (part 3)

By Paul Falcone

Rule 5: It’s okay to give an A.

Do you remember those college professors who never gave A’s? It seemed that no matter how hard you worked or how much extra credit you turned in, they were simply implacable:

An A was little more than a lofty dream.

It shouldn’t work that way in the workplace. Saying thank you for a job well done and recognizing special achievements should be a matter of practice, not a matter of exception. It’s perfectly acceptable to write at the conclusion of an appraisal:

Patty, thank you for your ongoing contributions and continued hard work over the past year. You’ve made our department a better place by your willingness to assume additional responsibilities, your friendly customer service, and by the care you put into everything you do. Keep up the excellent work, and remain a role model for your peers. I’m proud of you and very appreciative of all you’ve done.

Again, your merit pool may only be 2 percent, or maybe you have no merit pool at all this year. The overall score on the review shouldn’t be lowered because you have a smaller merit pool than you’d ideally like to have. What’s important is the written message: Those parting words in the annual review, now made into a formal company record, will have an incredible impact on your employee’s sense of job satisfaction and self-worth. And think what a gift you’ll have given her to

share with family and friends at home as well as perspective employers in years to come.

Of course, you should also be a bit cautious about being too flowery in your accolades and compliments. Should that employee later fall from grace and you terminate the individual for cause, your stellar recommendations from prior years may be enlarged and placed before a jury as evidence of the individual’s worth and work ethic.

Rule 6: Don’t give everyone A’s!

If you routinely give all of your direct reports the highest overall grade rankings, you’re probably doing something wrong. It’s possible to say that at one particular point in your career, every individual member on your team may be the best worker you’ve ever had the joy of supervising. Maybe you’ve got the best line-up of staff members in your entire industry.

Reality, though, is probably not quite as optimistic: Managers who award A’s to everyone on their team often have the problem of distinguishing between genuine superior performance and overall good work. They also often wish to avoid the confrontation that comes with providing more down to earth, albeit realistic performance scores.

The solution is pretty simple: Rank order your staff in terms of who is your most critical contributor versus who probably would make the least difference if she resigned tomorrow. Your superstar would be a 5; your ‘‘least stellar’’ worker, who still performs at a very acceptable level, would be a 3. Your other staff members will probably fall into the 4 category.

Think of it another way: You’re not doing your subordinates any favors if you continuously give them 5s. Agree together on areas for growth and learning and push them to develop their technical skills and formal education by attending discipline-specific workshops and conferences. It’s a more honest appraisal methodology, and a 5 will really be something to strive for.

If you’ve only given 5s in the past but want to give more 4s and 3s this year, simply hold a staff meeting in advance of the performance appraisal meetings and let your subordinates know that you’ll be evaluating everyone differently this year. State that although you’ve typically given higher grades to the group in the past, you want to work on customizing each appraisal this year in terms of objective feedback and development plans. That means the overall scores may be a bit lower, but the value of the entire process, especially the development plan, will increase, and that’s to everyone’s benefit.

Rule 7 : .........

Source : 2600 phrases for effective performance reviews. Paul Falcone. 2005


Related Articles

No comments: