My organization’s policy on performance evaluation is to do it every six months for all employees. It’s coming up to that time and, as a supervisor, I find myself dreading the event. Having to give performance feedback to people whose contributions you can’t do without, and then rating those performances, is stress-inducing. Can’t somebody come up with a substitute?
Twice a year, the performance evaluation monster rises from the deep to strike terror into the hearts of supervisors everywhere. But it needn’t be like that. It gets to be like that because too often it’s made to stand alone without the processes that make it fairly stress free.
I’m not one of those calling for the abolition of performance evaluation. There are too many good reasons for doing it. Among them:
- Employees deserve to know how their performances are perceived.
- Organizations need information about employees that supports decisions on retention, promotion, and other rewards.
- Performance documentation allows organizations to defend against wrongful dismissal and other actions.
To start to reduce the anxiety that frequently accompanies even the thought of performance evaluation, we need to start thinking of it as a phase of a performance management process rather than a process in and of itself. Performance management has three phases:
- Setting objectives/expectations
- Coaching and providing feedback
- Evaluation
Setting objectives/expectations
At the beginning of the performance period the supervisor and the employee need to agree on the dimensions of performance that the employee will be rated on. Objectives and expectations are not the same thing. Performance objectives are usually for employees whose jobs give them a certain discretionary control over how, when, and where they do their work. Performance expectations (or standards) are for employees whose jobs are constrained and reactive to the point where they really don’t have control over such things as workflow.
Here’s an example of a standard: Answer all e-mails within 24 hours.
And here’s an objective: Share the results of an employee engagement survey with senior management by July 31.
Performance objectives should be SMART: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Timed
‘Complete purchase of 15 AS400 photocopiers within the agreed upon timeframes and budget’ is specific. ‘Purchase photocopiers’ is not.
‘Answer all phone calls within three rings’ is measurable. ‘Answer phones’ is not.
‘Resolve all software problems within 30 minutes of notice’ is achievable. ‘Resolve all software problems within seven minutes’ is not.
For a CEO ‘Increase sales by 20%’ is relevant. ‘Answer all phone calls within three rings’ is not.
‘Complete salary forecast by March 31’ is timed. ‘Complete salary forecast’ is not.
Coaching and providing feedback
As the performance period unfolds, the employee needs to understand how the supervisor views how things are going. The nature of the coaching the supervisor provides will vary with how familiar the employee is with the performance in question. If the employee has never performed the task the supervisor will be more directive than if the employee is a veteran at the task. But newcomers and old timers both need feedback.
Supervisors sometimes make the mistake of mentally labelling employees as ‘good performers’ or ‘poor performers’ without regard to the work they’re doing. In the case of an employee who has never conducted a hiring interview but needs to, what matters is not what label she wears, but rather that she’s untrained, and it’s the supervisor?s responsibility to see that training happens. That’s part of the coaching and feedback phase. An employee who has lots of experience with interviews doesn?t need training, but she still needs feedback.
Each time a supervisor has a discussion with an employee about some aspect of the employee’s performance, a form of recognition occurs. Feedback can be positive:
‘You got all your reports in on time last week.’
It may be negative:
‘There are two errors on this spreadsheet.’
Feedback may be actionable:
‘You need to increase your sales by 10% next quarter.’
Or not:
‘Your sales have slumped.’
Feedback may be appropriate:
‘This is a good interview summary.’
Or inappropriate:
‘Why can’t you be more like Pat?’
As you’re probably gathering, giving performance feedback is a skill.
Evaluating performance
When supervisors provide clear expectations and coach employees toward achieving them, performance evaluation isn’t very stressful at all. The employee knows what the evaluation is likely to be, because her supervisor’s feedback has allowed her to know where she stands. The supervisor knows in advance how the employee is likely to react, because the employee already has the necessary feedback on her performance.
The stress and anxiety that surrounds performance evaluation arises from the absence of this prior information. When the employee has no information on what the supervisor will say, and the supervisor can’t therefore know how the employee will react, it’s no wonder they don’t exactly look forward to the event. By supporting evaluation with objectives, coaching, and feedback, the event becomes a ‘no surprises’ conversation.
I’ll return to the topic of performance management in future columns.
To submit a question for a future column, or to comment on a previous one, please contact editor@charityvillage.com. No identifying information will appear in this column. For paid professional advice about an urgent or complex situation, contact Tim directly.
Tim Rutledge, Ph.D., is a veteran human resources consultant and publisher of Mattanie Press. You can contact him at tim_rutledge@sympatico.ca or visit www.gettingengaged.ca.
Disclaimer: Advice and recommendations are based on limited information provided and should be used as a guideline only. Neither the author nor CharityVillage.com make any warranty, express or implied, or assume any legal liability for accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information provided in whole or in part within this article.
