By Dr. Marie Gould Harper
Program Director, Management
Note: This blog post is part 1 of a two-part series on performance reviews.
There are many situations when I will go to bat for a Human Resources department. Annual performance reviews are not one of them. After being on both sides of the table, I still don’t see performance reviews being a major “value add” to an organization.
Performance appraisals were designed to give supervisors and their direct reports an opportunity to engage and communicate about each employee’s quality of work. Unfortunately, that is not what is occurring during many of these encounters. Both managers and employees don’t see the value in this review process, but organizations continue to require their workforce to undergo performance reviews.
Performance Reviews Proven to Upset Employees and Managers
An Adobe survey found that 25% of employees left a performance review in tears, and 60% of those individuals thought they should quit after receiving a bad review. Similarly, 60% of managers felt the performance review process was outdated, wasted their time and had an adverse impact on their ability to do their job.
The same report also indicated that men are more likely to have a stronger reaction to a bad review than women, and 43% of men and 31% of women have looked into switching companies after a bad review. Also, 25% of males and 18% of females reported having cried after a poor review, and 28% of males (11% of females) have quit their jobs entirely.
If Performance Reviews Are So Bad, Why Are They Still in Use?
As much as we talk about cutting edges, best practices and trending, we are creatures of habit. The majority of organizations are still sold on doing what is convenient and familiar. It doesn’t matter that a process is ineffective.
I’ve heard the argument that without someone conducting annual performance reviews, an organization would be vulnerable to lawsuits for cases such as wrongful discharge. My response has been, “There has to be a better way.”
Management Sometimes Supports Good Employees Who Have Bad Reviews
About 15 years ago, I did an informal study. I had the opportunity to teach a bachelor-level Human Resource Management course at two different universities at the same time. Both groups consisted of working adult learners. One group was located in a metropolitan area and the other group was in the suburbs.
When we got to the compensation section of the course, I created an assessment involving the performance review process for determining the annual salary increase for a group of employees. Different scenarios were created and no situation was cut and dried.
One scenario involved a stellar performer who had been with the company for many years. However, his performance had suffered during the past year due to personal problems at home. To make a long story short, the metropolitan group went back and forth as to whether or not he should receive a good increase for the year.
The suburban group unanimously agreed that the employee should get an excellent raise along the same lines that he had received in previous years. When I challenged them with the fact that they might put their organization in jeopardy if the employee’s performance did not improve and termination was necessary, they stated they would take the chance.
Employees form friendships at work during their careers. These bonds exist also between employees and supervisors. The moral of this story is that there may be times when that friendship might be stronger than the supervisor’s loyalty to the company. But in this particular situation, the organization’s performance review process could potentially lead to an adverse verdict in a court of law.
Business friendships also need to observe legal limitations. For example, let’s say a poor-performing employee attempts to hide his failures by writing bogus sales figures to boost the bottom line. If the supervisor knows about it and still gives his co-worker friend a good evaluation, the company could find itself in court charged with complicity to defraud stockholders.
It’s Time for Performance Reviews to Leave The Workplace
Retaining talented, hard-working employees is worth the effort. But even good employees will leave an organization if they know they can get away from the unpleasant requirement of performance reviews. The Adobe report found that 41% of workers would switch to a company without a formal review process, even if the pay and job level were the same.
A process should be replaced when it is no longer effective. Lisa Bodell, founder and CEO of New York management consulting company futurethink, suggested that we dump performance reviews and focus on the daily interactions between managers and their direct employees. That’s what real engagement is and it serves as a foundation for putting a more efficient system in place.
About the Author
Dr. Marie Gould Harper is the Program Director of Management. She holds an undergraduate degree in psychology from Wellesley College, a master’s degree in instructional systems from Pennsylvania State University and a doctorate in business from Capella University. She is a progressive coach, facilitator, writer, strategist and human resources/organizational development professional with more than 30 years of leadership, project management and administrative experience. Dr. Gould Harper has worked in both corporate and academic environments.
Dr. Gould Harper is an innovative thinker and strong leader, manifesting people skills, a methodical approach to problems, organizational vision and an ability to inspire followers. She is committed to continuous improvement in organizational effectiveness and human capital development, customer service and the development of future leaders.
Comments are closed.