Employee Performance Reviews should not be Abolished – No
If you have ever written a performance review, you know how time-consuming they are, and how difficult they can be to deliver to employees. If you have ever received an evaluation that made you seethe, cringe, or cry, it may be tempting to write reviews off as painful and unnecessary. So, should employee performance reviews be abolished?
Feedback is an important motivator for so many reasons. Poor performers need to know not only that they are not meeting expectations, but also how to improve. Good performers need to know that their efforts to meet expectations are noticed and appreciated. Likewise, employees need to know that their peers are being held accountable to the same standards that they are expected to meet. Performance reviews are necessary for ensuring that essential feedback occurs.
Performance reviews also have legal implications. In many cases, they are used to determine annual merit increases, so the documentation serves to support that managers doled out raises in a fair manner, based on performance. If a woman, minority, or other member of a legally protected class discovers she earned a lower percentage increase than a colleague and decides to sue, the employer had better be able to produce documented evidence that her performance warranted the increase she received. Similarly, if an employee is terminated or passed up for promotion based on performance, a documented performance history showing that the employee not only failed to meet expectations, but was also made aware of the failure and given opportunity to improve, is the employer's legal protection.
So, what can be done to make the performance review process less painful and more meaningful?
Documentation is the key. A manager who keeps good notes all year long will be able to draft a review with more impact. Generic statements like, "Suzie is a real team player," are nice, but really do not tell the employee much. How was Suzie a good team player in the last year? A review should include an example or two that demonstrates how she went to bat for a colleague or met a particularly critical output goal because of good coordination. This shows the employee that her manager was paying attention and makes her feel appreciated for her efforts. She will look for more opportunities to impress her boss.
Solid documentation serves to support constructive feedback, too. When Bob hears that he needs to work on his adaptability, he will justifiably want to know when he failed to be adaptable. If his manager can point to the time he resisted a request to switch projects due to a changing business need, he will see not only that his performance could have been detrimental to meeting department goals, but also what to watch for and improve on in the future.
All of that said, a performance review should not be the first time an employee hears she is a good team player, or that he needs to be more adaptable to changing needs. Regular performance feedback is critical to not only meeting the demands of the business, but also making employees feel valued. Managers should give performance feedback as often as possible, but they have work tasks of their own, above and beyond coaching and developing employees. The formal performance review process is a way to ensure that feedback happens on a routine basis.
Abolishing employee performance reviews is a bad idea for many reasons. Though they are time consuming to write and often difficult to deliver and receive, managers should be held accountable for the development of the employees reporting to them. The company deserves the legal protection afforded by documented performance, and employees deserve regular feedback to know how to continuously improve, and to feel appreciated by their employers.
