Performance Evaluations

A performance evaluation system is a talent management tool that, when used effectively, can promote an organization’s values and ensure you have the right people in the right positions, and with the support and pay to ensure they stick with you. And while performance evaluations are not legally required, they can make or break an employer’s defense in any employment law case. So with so many reasons to do evaluations, why are they approached with reluctance and dread by employees and managers alike?

One reason is they take time and careful planning. If evaluations are associated only with “papering a file before being fired,” or if managers are ill prepared to give effective feedback, then the process is not acknowledging or retaining top talent, or providing career development guidance. If managers avoid giving honest reviews to minimize or avoid conflict, they probably need to be taught how to handle difficult employees. Other challenges include the perception that evaluations take too much time away from immediate operational demands, and managers are not being held accountable when they fail to provide reviews.

Balancing all those challenges are an even longer list of benefits. Performance reviews help companies retain top talent, promote productivity and morale, address employees who are not pulling their weight, promote a sense of fairness, and support important personnel decisions on compensation, promotions and terminations. A well-written evaluation can also be an employer’s strongest defense against lawsuits, just as poorly done evaluations or lack of an evaluation can be fatal to a case. 

Focus on Performance

An ideal performance review system is based on objectivity, consistency, timeliness and accuracy. Objectivity means the assessment focuses on an employee’s performance and behaviors, not on the person or his/her personal characteristics (such as age, race, gender or disability). Objectivity requires an evidence-based approach with examples that support the assessments.

For example, instead of stating that an employee “did not try hard enough,” the focus should be on the result of the lack of effort, such as “project did not get completed on time,” or “three major reports are unfinished.” Performance goals should be measurable and achievable. Using rating factors or scores is helpful, provided they are job-related. Consider using weighted factors, since all factors are not equally important for every job. 

Consistency on All Levels

Evaluation systems should be consistent on all levels, but not identical. The forms and structure of the process should reflect the values of the organization and the overall purpose of the evaluation process. Several different forms will be necessary to reflect each job’s primary duties. Managers should be consistent. If some managers are easy graders while others are perceived as impossible to please, certain employees will feel that they are being treated unfairly. Each mana-ger must be consistent in how he or she rates employees. This does not mean that each employee receives the same assessment or score, but rather employees should be evaluated against the same standards and expectations. 

Finally, each employee’s written evaluation should be internally consistent. Written comments and an overall score should be consistent with the individual scores or rankings in each category.

The Best Time is Now

Provide feedback in real time. Relying solely on long review cycles (such as annual ones) means that some of the content may be stale or based on a “what have you done for me lately” approach. Also, noteworthy performances that occurred at the beginning of a review cycle may never be addressed.  Effective review systems build in “mid-cycle” progress reports, or incorporate methods for providing real-time feedback immediately at the end of significant events. 

For example, a project leader should be required to complete written assessments on his/her team at the end of each project, or when completing important phases of long-term projects.  Mid-year progress reports are typically shorter than the overall annual evaluation, but they capture vital information about an employee’s day-to-day performance, provide immediate feedback and coaching for improvement and/or validation, and make it easier to complete the annual evaluation.  The annual evaluation then becomes the time to acknowledge overall areas of strength, address areas of weakness and develop new performance goals for the upcoming review cycle.

Honesty is the Best Policy

Written evaluations must be accurate. Managers should prepare by reviewing the employee’s job description (assuming that it is up to date and accurate) and any prior progress reports, supervisory notes and records regarding the employee’s attendance, discipline, training and performance during the review period. For example, an employee may be perceived as having poor attendance. However, when actual attendance records are consulted, it may show many absences were for protected medical concerns (such as FMLA leave), or the employee did not have the worst attendance record in the department. Managers should not rely on memory alone.

Once the written form is completed, the manager should meet with the employee to discuss the evaluation in a manner that encourages two-way communication and provides direction to the employee. If an evaluation is particularly negative, the meeting should include a second manager or human resources representative.

Other Best Practices

Evaluation systems benefit from employee engagement. Self-evaluation forms and/or opportunities to develop individual and department goals are useful. Employees also should be invited to provide written comments to their evaluations. Some workplaces are suitable for 360-type review systems (where an employee is reviewed by his or her supervisor, peers, and subordinates or internal customers). This system can provide an employee with a comprehensive picture of his or her performance and role within an organization.

Accountability is key to implementing an evaluation system. Managers must be evaluated on how well they provide thoughtful, effective and honest reviews. If they are not given the message that evaluations are an important talent management tool, they will not be motivated to participate in a meaningful way. Of course, this will require that everyone engages in the process, from the top of the organization to the most junior supervisor. Many times, the quality of the performance evaluation system is directly affected by the support and participation of senior management in the process.   

Doing effective reviews is a learned skill, so managers need training. That includes how to write and present evaluations in a meaningful and engaging way. Role playing difficult conversations can help managers confidently and effectively provide constructive feedback and handle difficult employees. Training should also communicate the value of doing evaluations thoroughly and honestly and how evaluations support the organization’s mission and goals.

Attorney Andrea Chatfield is Of Counsel at Cook, Little, Rosenblatt & Manson, PLLC in  Manchester, where she advises business clients on employment law. She can be reached at 603-621-7118 or a.chatfield@clrm.com.