Why do we undertake performance reviews
Almost all businesses undertake at least a yearly performance review, what value do they make?
Many say that it is a defensible process that enables managers to ‘deal’ with exceptional and poor performers. That these factors also influence pay and may be a precursor to staff undergoing a performance improvement plan.
Isn’t it obvious who the high achievers are and who the poor performers are, to their immediate managers. How many HR practitioners have had to start from the beginning when the yearly performance process, just concluded, found that the individual performance was ‘satisfactory’.
Performance reviews are seen as good for ‘others’ to undertake as ‘they’ need motivating, whereas ‘we’ are self-motivated.
Why is it that when the GM or other senior executive walks the floor, everything tightens a little and people are more focused on their tasks and when the GM goes out of the office, staff relax a little.
How many managers rush through the end-of-year performance review as they have too many to undertake and still need to run their portfolios.
How about an alternative:
Managers meeting the individuals in their teams on a regular basis is a good idea, it can help grow a sense of team and purpose that improves productivity and retention. One way of achieving this is for the manager to meet with the individual on a quarterly basis, based on the month that the individual joined. This would mean that the manager would meet with 2 – 3 people a month to provide feedback and be more manageable, than the yearly squash of meetings.
The meeting could focus on areas that the employee is doing well and areas that they could develop. The employee was employed as they were seen to be the best person for the role, so the purpose is not to berate the individual. They should leave the meeting with a sense that their contribution is valued and some goals to either pursue or maintain. If there are areas of concern, then these should be dealt with separately as part of the performance improvement process.
If the manager is not that aware of how an individual has performed, have the employee suggest 2 people that they would like to provide feedback, who is selected will inform the manager significantly as to how the individual perceives their performance. This may be good practice for all staff or at random intervals.
The meeting should be short, 30 minutes is enough time to identify any key areas of praise or concern. The meeting has an agenda and finish with any action items that need to be reviewed before the next meeting. Recording and reviewing may prompt action, this is an improvement on the 6 monthly talk.
The simplicity of breaking down the process to smaller more manageable ‘chunks’ will add significantly to the parties buying into this method and may create better, more productive outcomes.
If you are looking to recruit or have other HR needs People2Growth can help, contact Damien Berglas (mob 0417 625 491) for a confidential discussion of your HR businesses needs.
