Evaluating the performance of the annual appraisal
There is a growing feeling that it may now be time to sack the performance appraisal for its poor performance.
The long-standing way in which employees have been assessed is increasingly being seen as out-of-date and no longer the best way to measure performance.
An internet search of the phrase ‘performance appraisals don’t work’ produced over six million results at the time of writing.
Having to evaluate the performance of staff was at one time said to be the second most disliked task that a manager had to perform .The most disliked was dismissing staff.
Many employees dread the performance review and see it as a way in which they feel forced to justify what they do. The process has been described variously as insulting, demeaning, anxiety-inducing and dreaded
Research by YouGov commissioned by MHR, found that over half of those (54 per cent) that took part in the study believed that annual appraisals were outdated. The criticism saw it labelled as ‘pointless’ and ‘time-consuming’.
Managers and employees were united in thinking appraisals were cumbersome and an old-fashioned and rigid model that lead to ineffective employee engagement in the modern workplace.
Perhaps one of the most surprising statistics from the report, published in 2017, was the fact that just under a quarter (21 per cent) of those that took part in the study said they had not had an appraisal at their current job.
There is a trend now which is seeing an increasing number of organisations choosing to ditch the traditional appraisal. Big name companies that did so a number of years ago include Deloitte, Microsoft and Accenture. The replacement is said to provide more fluid feedback.
The new way of carrying out appraisals has seen the focus shift to the advancement of the employee rather than it being on performance.
General Electric embraced the new type of appraisal when it scrapped the four decade old review system it once utilised. The company, which has employees in 170 countries, is said to have opted for a system of ‘insights’.
It provides feedback from both managers and colleagues and it is said to celebrate and encourage an employee when they do something good, while providing constructive criticism when performance shows opportunities for improvement or needs guidance.
The conventional performance appraisal process will typically see the manager fill in a review document with the member of staff filing in other sections explaining what they have done well, and also having to highlight areas where they have perhaps not done so well.
Negative feedback can create tension and in some cases have significant ramifications, especially if it is linked to a pay rise or bonus.
In many cases what is documented is likely to be based on what the manager can remember. It really boils down to a matter of opinions as real performance assessment can be long process and time consuming.
Change can be a slow process and for employees still going through the conventional performance appraisal system help is at hand. ACAS has produced practical guidance on the process and what you should expect.
The guidance describes managing the performance of employees as a continuous process, which is central to the relationship between managers and employees.
In managing performance ACAS list key points as:
Good performance management helps everyone in the organisation.
Where a performance management system is working well employees are more likely to engage with the goals of the business.
Managing performance is central to the relationship between managers and employees.
The way performance is managed should be fair to all staff.
Regardless of how the performance management review is conducted it should be designed to help employee to develop and progress in their career.
We are here to help if you have any questions regarding the above post.