Performance From Appraisal
Performance Reviews – Time For a Change?
How coaching can be applied to appraisals!
The current view
Performance appraisal generally represent the one time of the year when getting on with work is put on hold while enormous quantities of management-hours are spent in the earnest ritual of rating and ranking individual performance.
In some organisations the practice is even more frequent. It is not unusual to find appraisals being conducted twice a year, monthly or in some cases even weekly. They are known in many organisations as the 'one-to-one'.
Should we be looking more deeply and questioning whether appraisals as we know them really work? Is management time and effort well spent or is it undermining performance in the name of good human relations?
The notion behind performance appraisal - that workers should be held accountable for their performance - is reasonable. However, the evidence suggests that the idea is wrong. Individual behaviour in organisations and thus their achievements are governed more by the system they work in than anything they are able to do or not do.
All performance is subject to variation both internal and external. When studied an individuals performance will reveal that it is subject to normal variation in most cases. A 'win' or lose' is just as probable. Yet individuals believe, as their managers do, that they are responsible.
As an example, many managers are held responsible for things which they have the ability to influence to a degree but not, to control to the extent where they can consistently forecast the outcome on a regular basis. However, their appraisal judges them directly on this criterion. This causes resentment of the appraisal system and often the appraiser.
Most people have come to accept accountability for their performance. When, as is inevitable, they risk being perceived as not performing, people 'cheat because they will do anything to keep the boss happy'. Their ingenuity is engaged in surviving rather than improving performance which is an unnecessary waste of time and human talent.
Contrary to assumptions, appraisal is not an effective means of performance improvement - it is judgement rather than feedback; a judgement imposed by the perceived hierarchy. Useful feedback, on the other hand, would be information that told both the appraiser and appraisee how well the system in which they are working functioned, and suggested how to improve it.
A different view
To get an idea of what this means we have to turn to world-class organisations. In the Toyota production system there is nothing that is recognisable as performance appraisal. Every operation in the system has an associated measure. The measure has been worked out between the operators and their manager. In every case the measure is related to the purpose of the work. That measure is the basis of feedback to the manager and worker alike.
Decision-making is integrated with work. If there is a problem with performance, it immediately is reflected in the measure. The manager and operator seek the causes and turn them into a basis for improving the method.
Toyota's basic idea is expressed by the axiom 'bad news first'. Both managers and workers are psychologically safe in the knowledge that it is the system - not the worker - that is the primary influence on performance. It is management's responsibility to ensure that the workers operate in a system that enables them to perform.
Performance appraisal, on the other hand, sprang from a different managerial assumption. To judge achievement, managers use data about an individual's activity, not the process or system's achievement of purpose. The result is that performance appraisal is judgement of one over another, ignoring the true influences on performance. Thus the appraisal experience becomes one of pleasing the boss, psychologically unsafe and socially driven, determining who is 'in' and who is 'out'.
Human resources professionals claim that managers should strive for objectivity and thus feedback rather than judgement. But the simple fact of the matter is that the nature of hierarchy distorts the concept of feedback into judgement because performance measures are conceived hierarchically.
When judgement is replaced by feedback in the true sense, organisations will have a lot more time to devote to their clients and their business. No time will be wasted in appraisal. This first requires a fundamental shift in the way we think about the role of performance appraisals, and how best to utilise them as a positive tool for improvement.
A new approach (with a coach)
If performance reviews are to continue, industry must take another look at changing how they are perceived, carried out and the information generated is used. In general once an appraisal has taken place the forms are filed away and will not see the light of day for the next twelve months. How much better would it be if the appraisal information were used as a tool to improve performance and monitor it?
There are few areas in industry where performance is not subject to intense measurement and scrutiny. Somehow though, measuring continual human development does not get the attention it deserves. That it absolutely should cannot be denied. It is an area of opportunity that ought to be targeted as a “must do” rather than neglected in the way it currently is. There is no robot (yet) that can manage a live project that requires interaction with others so, we still need managers, aka people.
What if, the results of an appraisal were used to set targets or goals for improvement? What if, areas of importance could be agreed during the appraisal, what constitutes a successful outcome and, a time frame for the process set? What if, training identified at the review was not only undertaken but actually applied in the workplace rather than being quickly forgotten. Is there conceivably a way that an individuals or teams performance would not improve over for example a six month period?
If, in addition to the above employees limiting beliefs were challenged and replaced with positive ones, values identified, human needs met, confidence boosted and communication improved, amongst other things, would this not be a truly successful outcome? Could this scenario produce anything other than a win-win situation? The valuable time commitment by senior staff undertaking appraisals would have a definite purpose. Time and money spent on training would not be wasted as the benefits would be clearly visible.
The process described above is brought about by a coach working with the appraisee and monitoring and encouraging development throughout their time together. A coach in this instance is someone with a specific set of skills developed through intensive training with a good knowledge of the industry and its people. It should be acknowledged that it is not entirely necessary for a coach to have knowledge of a particular industry as unlike mentoring advice is not being given. A coach uses questions that probe and challenge a client into a deeper level of thinking that enables them to come to their own conclusions. People are more empowered when they find answers for themselves.
In addition to the obvious benefits described above there needs to be consideration of the underlying message adopting this system sends to employees at all levels. It is a clear demonstration that an organisation is not only forward thinking and progressive in its approach to staff development it also sets new standards that will help to retain valued employees and attract new ones. It would be a head turner at an interview if a statement such as “with appraisals we apply career coaching as part of our continuing staff development.”
In summary I believe that the system as it stands does not work. It is a process undertaken under sufferance rather than with enthusiasm by both parties. It is something that is not at the top of most people’s values list which is why yearly appraisals turn into two yearly appraisals or more. The standard performance review has a low probability of delivering tangible benefit to either the employer or employees and is seen by employees as a judgmental tool that treats them harshly. There is nothing to lose in trying a new approach and everything to gain.
Satisfied and content staff that have a clearly defined career path and are actively engaged in working to mutual (company and their) goals is a situation that should be desired by all.
Len Foster
Certified Professional Coach
Please contact me Len Foster to discuss how you can dramatically improve your employees performance through coaching just call 07502 046359 or visit www.new-horizonscoaching.com and use the contact us service.
Date: 29/05/2008
Category: BUSINESS EDITORIAL