Performance reviews are viewed as a necessary evil.
HR needs documentation of your performance over time in the event hard decisions need to be made when it's time to cut staff.
Employees hate to hear negative feedback because after all, nobody is perfect.
But the fact of the matter is that when performance reviews are done right, the employees are better off which directly affects the performance of the organization.
How do you know if your performance review process isn't quite up to par?
Subjectivity, nepotism, and disagreement with feedback are always a part of the process.
However, it's an organizational leader's job to recognize the faults with the process, communicate those faults to the masses, and do his or her best to make sure that everyone gets a fair shake by enforcing the process.
HR needs documentation of your performance over time in the event hard decisions need to be made when it's time to cut staff.
Employees hate to hear negative feedback because after all, nobody is perfect.
But the fact of the matter is that when performance reviews are done right, the employees are better off which directly affects the performance of the organization.
How do you know if your performance review process isn't quite up to par?
- Your fate has been predetermined. A old colleague of mine had a Japanese word for -- nemawashi--- these are the meetings before the meetings when the decision has been made on your rating and promotion. When these meetings go too far, it completely undermines the process if someone is doing their due diligence and trying to put together an objective view of an employee's performance.
- There is zero accountability. If timelines come and go and nobody meets them when it's time to turn in performance documentation, how effective is the process? If performance is important to the growth and health of an organization, then it should be taken as seriously as you would your own health.
- Nobody really cares about their performance in the first place. I read a BCG essay that said "performance is the point." I'm sure I just took that completely out of context and that the smart guys at BCG were talking about company financials. BUT, there are a lot of people at companies that really don't want to grow professionally. Whose fault is that? Is it their's or the company's?
Subjectivity, nepotism, and disagreement with feedback are always a part of the process.
However, it's an organizational leader's job to recognize the faults with the process, communicate those faults to the masses, and do his or her best to make sure that everyone gets a fair shake by enforcing the process.
Comments
Post a Comment