Yikes. It's that time of year again - annual performance
evaluations are due. All sorts of emotions are triggered
– not the least of which is old fashioned dread. But why
such anxiety over a process that is supposed to improve performance
and further the company's achievement of its goals.
Well, in many cases performance evaluations are based on poorly
articulated goals and objectives with little attention paid to them
until evaluation time rolls around. Then the employee sits down
with the boss and has a vague discussion about subjective topics
that are not really measurable in the first place. This process can
lead to a lowering of employee morale, particularly if the employee
is surprised by criticisms not previously raised. For the most
part, delivering a "surprise" to an employee in an annual
evaluation is as much an indication that the manager failed to
effectively "manage" throughout the year as it is an
indication that the employee failed to perform. Performance
evaluations should be only a small part of an ongoing coaching and
development program – not a "gotcha" at the
end.
In addition to ongoing feedback from managers, another way to
avoid delivering surprises in annual evaluations is to make
employees accountable for identifiable results. If an evaluation
contains vague and broad categories that fail to identify employee
responsibilities that have a true impact on results, the stage is
set for unpleasant surprises. A truly effective evaluation measures
an employee's performance against predefined standards that the
employee knows and understands as he performs his job throughout
the year.
Another effective way to take the sting out of annual evaluations
is to hold the boss accountable for the success of those he/she
supervises and evaluates. This works to motivate the boss to engage
in an ongoing process of giving feedback year round. It also tends
to reduce the amount of "blame" the boss transfers to his
subordinates for problems in his/her department.
The bottom line is that a performance evaluation should be a
collaborative effort undertaken by the supervisor and his
subordinate on an ongoing basis. This gives the supervisor
opportunities to provide candid feedback that identifies strengths
and weaknesses in routine non-threatening settings that can be
beneficial to both - while helping the company achieve its goals at
the same time.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
