We Have Always Done It That Way

Performance evaluations certainly sound better in theory than they do in practice. From an organizational perspective, it makes perfect sense, in theory, to monitor and evaluate the performance of employees. Those who do not perform well could be corrected or terminated, thus improving the overall performance of the system. Those who perform exceptionally well could be rewarded, providing incentives for others to increase their performance. The process, in theory, seems straightforward: sit the employee down with the supervisor, perhaps with the assistance of a written form, and identify a set of goals and objectives, or standards at the beginning of the year, and then meet again at the end of the year to measure results against those standards.

That’s a nice fantasy, isn’t it? This “theory” of performance evaluation is unfortunately riddled with questionable assumptions and an incomplete understanding of human systems and how they work. Conventional wisdom has told us for years why we need to do what we have been doing, and it is time we start challenging this wisdom based on wisdom we have gained from our actual experiences in organizations.

Conventional wisdom: when employees know their performance will be monitored and evaluated, it will motivate them to perform better.

Experiential wisdom: performance evaluations do not motivate people””they only scare them, and fear is never a good motivator in organizations. At the end of the day, people are afraid of getting “dinged” in their evaluation. It is psychologically uncomfortable to have a “superior” give you a bad grade, so your focus turns to things that will cause you to get a good grade (not necessarily things that will help you develop or help your organization’s performance). With your attention on avoiding a reprimand, you end up actually lowering your sights to the level just above that mark.

Conventional wisdom: we need the performance evaluation system to document poor performance as legal cover to our terminations.

Experiential wisdom: yes, you need to document poor performance, but no, you do not need to do it through the performance evaluation system. Try creating a separate system specifically for documenting poor performance and keep your performance evaluation system focused wholly on employee development and organizational performance. Once people know that their evaluations can be held against them, trust disappears, and with trust goes open expression and communication. Without open communication, the performance evaluation system cannot work.

So take a look at what your experience in your organization is telling you, and use that to redesign the performance evaluation system. Clarify the intent of the system, and revise the structure accordingly. Allow for more frequent evaluations of performance. Allow for feedback to flow in all directions (yes, bosses, it is useful to be evaluated by your subordinates). Give people the time they need to implement the system effectively. And when you are done, use your newly acquired experiential wisdom (not conventional) to make the necessary modifications.

Tags: Staff Issues, The Way We Manage, We've Always Done It That Way // Add Comment »