By Paul Falcone
Rule 7 : Whenever possible, shift the responsibility for evaluating performance back to your employees.
The reason most employees receive their evaluations late is because supervisors don’t have the time to collect the data necessary to write a good review. In addition, since relaying negative news can be confrontational (and we all know that the path of least resistance is avoidance), many supervisors postpone documenting sub par performance for fear of making matters worse with the staff.
You’ll find (much to your surprise!) that many employees will appreciate the opportunity to bring to your attention their perceptions of how they’ve done, what they plan to do, and how you could help. And that automatically puts you in the role of career mentor and coach—not unilateral decision maker and disciplinarian. You’ll also learn that the majority of workers will be harder on themselves than you would have ever been. That should take some of the stress off of you in terms of having to surface negative information. It works this way: About a week before you need to draft your staff appraisals, instruct your direct reports to address their overall performance in three critical areas:
1. Address your overall performance track record for this review period. Specifically address your achievements that have resulted in increased revenues, reduced expenses, or saved time. Why is XYZ Company a better place for your having worked here? How have you had to reinvent your
job in light of our department’s changing needs? And how would you grade yourself in terms of work quality, reliability, interpersonal communication, and technical skills?
2. In what area(s) do you feel you need additional support, structure, or direction? Specifically, where can I, as your supervisor, provide you with additional support in terms of acquiring new skills, strengthening your overall performance, and preparing you for your next move in career progression?
3. What are your performance goals for the next year? What are the measurable outcomes so that we’ll know that you’ll have reached those goals? Once you receive their initial feedback, you could then go on to draft your own staff appraisal. By allowing employees to take the first stab at outlining their goals and achievements, you’ll automatically capture what they feel are their most significant issues. You’ll be reminded of the achievements they’ve made throughout the year, and you’ll be in a much better position to draft a comprehensive and objective annual report.
Expect an ‘‘emotional involvement rate’’ of 20–70–10 in this exercise, as follows:
- 20 percent of your staff will love this exercise and provide you with all the bells and whistles—productivity graphs, cost savings spreadsheets, and copies of letters of recommendation they’ve received from customers throughout the review period. (This is the key target group for the
exercise.)
- 70 percent will do an adequate job in engaging themselves in the self-review process; however, their answers may be somewhat superficial or unsubstantiated.
- 10 percent may refuse to participate: They might argue that it’s your job to evaluate them and not theirs. But then again, that tells you a lot about their motivation and entitlement mentality, doesn’t it? Maybe their own refusal to participate should be incorporated into the narrative of the annual review as evidence of their overall work ethic.
On the other hand, you may naturally fear confrontation by allowing employees to initiate the process and have first say. For example, if you feel that one particular employee is a sub par performer, but that individual may think he’s the best thing since sliced bread, then you’re sure to invite conflict, right? Wrong! Remember, you write the actual review. This pre-review draft is not the actual appraisal form that will end up in the employee’s personnel file.
And if it turns out that you both have very different perceptions of the individual’s contributions, it’s okay to disagree. This will provide you a key opportunity to open up the lines of communication regarding reasons for the differences in your perceptions. After all, if you simply roll over the individual in the annual review process like a Sherman Tank with a one sided
diatribe, you’ll only initiate a paper war with a stark rebuttal. Talk first, then write. If you both agree to disagree, then so be it. In the end, you’ll keep control of the entire process, your authority will remain intact, and you’ll initiate a dialog to reach a mutual ground. If the employee follows your review with a rebuttal nonetheless, it will likely be milder and ‘‘less attacking’’ if there have been open discussions before anything was committed to writing.
One final thought: Some employees will request formal feedback on a more regular basis than once per year. (You know who they are.) Consider formally reviewing them twice a year or even possibly once per quarter by shifting the responsibility for data collection and initial review back to them. In essence, they’ll do all the legwork, and you’ll create an environment in which they could motivate themselves. It requires a minimal time investment on your part, and you’ll find that they’ll spread the good news about your enlightened management style with their peers. Objective feedback on a consistent basis is what it’s all about.
Source : 2600 phrases for effective performance reviews. Paul Falcone. 2005
No comments:
Post a Comment