Eliminating Performance Appraisals

System

Has anyone come to the conclusion, as I have, that performance appraisals are a waste of time and really cause more potential liability than gain? I am seriously thinking of doing away with them entirely and training our supervisors more in the direction of recognition, reward, coaching, and discipline. I would be interested to hear any thoughts on the subject.

Gillian3

Yes, although the idea isn't too popular. My decision was based on the expert witness work that I do - almost 150 employment cases, for both plaintiff and defense. Performance appraisals are killers and are one of the most important elements in the forming of my opinions. More often than not, I find people fired for things that are not referenced in appraisals, appraisals showing poor performance just after an event such as filing some sort of charge, appraisals not available because they weren't done, etc. etc.

I think performance appraisals make employers look bad, the jury doesn't believe them and that there is a reason why the appraisal process is the #1 topic of business related cartoons - check out Dilbert. When I quit collecting them, I was up to about 60.

Rodney

Alot of good information has been posted. I will say up front that I am an independent consultant and nothing that I say is intended as advertising.

Having been internal in HR and designed a company review for them, I came to a point a few years ago that I didn't believe in them any more. Most people seem to leave a review upset & not motivated. A catalyst in my thought change is a book written by Tom Coens & Mary Jenkins, "Abolish Performance Appraisals." It is interesting reading.

In spite of my thinking I also realize that performance reviews are not going away for most. I agree with most statements here that the primary problem is that they are done once a year and frequently are not done well. Also, I learned quickly that many people back into a review depending on money they had to give for raises. I think they should be done more frequently, or call it feedback, and supervisors need continuous training in coaching, etc. It is no wonder to me that we keep seeing new attempts for a differ format (360, MBO, weighted, etc)

Recently I presented a workshop on this subject. One person said they do reviews so they have documentation for termination (no wonder they have a bad name)! No one could easily answer the question of what is the purpose.

A colleague and I have been developing a program to address issues with reviews; looking to refocus and train those that deliver them. I am happy to talk to anyone off line but don't want to advertise. As someone else said a valuable system can be set up but it takes a lot of work & the culture must support the importance of communicating, coaching & career development & not just production.

I am refreshed to see that their are others out there who believe there must be a better way. To me a huge part of all of this has to do with trust vs. control. Good luck.

mwild31

In the usual and customary way appraisals are given, meaning, once a year, yes, appraisals are a waste of time. However, documenting performance is not. Once a year appraisals often only really document what's been happening within the last month or so (it's good if you can remember up to 2 months), usually the most negative stuff is remembered than the positive stuff and many, many, many times, supervisors throw things into the appraisal that they've never actually discussed with the ee prior to the appraisal. And, don't even get me started on 360 appraisals - yuck! The project I've been given this year is to create an appraisal system that 'flows in real time'. What this means is taking the Lean Manufacturing concepts of one-piece flow (as a means of producing items more efficiently than in a batch and queue method) and utilizing them in the appraisal world. We've already gotten a bit of a head start in that we created our own online system of documenting performance, which works terrifically, but now we need to take it a little further to ensure the ee's know what's being recorded as well. As I move along in this process, I would be happy to share what we develop. For what it's worth, I think what you're contemplating is important and well worth the effort. Just my thoughts.

Gillian3

Exactly, the alternative to the annual performance appraisal is to have supervisors who understand that it is their job to continually guide, train, and sometimes discipline employees. This will take support from the top and lots of supervisor training. Hope that you both are sucessful.

System

I am very interested in hearing more about the "revamp" of your appraisal process. I am particularly intrigued by your on-line documentation. Could you tell me a little more about that? Also, yes, keep me up to date on your progress. Thanks much!

AluminumBoy

We have no performance appraisals. Our company has over 10,000 employees.

However, feedback, coaching, and accountability are expectations of our leaders. We provide several resources to help with this.

TLC Shelly

Our company has a policy stating that evaluations are to be done annually; however, in all honesty, they do not get completed until the employee asks for a raise. Our supervisors are actually very good about documenting performance issues and counselling the employees as those issues arise. I'm sure they would be open to eliminating the "annual" performance appraisal policy. Without formal evals, how do you handle raises?

AluminumBoy

This will be just mind boggling to the HR types out there, but the manager uses his /her judgement within some boundaries.

Our leaders are trained to be coaches...some are good at it, others struggle, but they are all expected to give routine feedback as to how people are doing, so people should not be surprised. Of course, things don't work perfectly.

When raises are given, people are certainly given feedback as to why they got what they did. It's just not part of a paper (or e) system that mandates you write this stuff down on an annual basis.

Our managers are trained to document when actions don't meet expectations, and most do a good job of this.

We have a very unique culture. This may not work everywhere. I'd recommend careful consideration as to how well equipped your leaders are in handling this type of system regarding raises. Expecting excellence and coaching people to success has to be part of the culture. If your leaders are bothered with doing that, you may need to keep pounding on them with a structured system, one that is "liability friendly". You'd want a local law dog involved to help you create a system that would help shield you from liability given slack supervisors and managers. It can be done.

TLC Shelly

Thanks. I'll pass this on to the powers-that-be.

lee2

Guess I have a different experience. With over 35 years of designing, implementing, and administering performance appraisals, my judgement is that they are like many other HR policies - if they are administered properly they quite valuable; if they are not, they do more harm than good.

Dasher

Lee2 makes a lot of sense to me. We revamped our appraisal system three years ago and it gets better every year -- because of the additional training we provide to the evaluators. Also, we include two oversights -- HR review looks for inconsistency in responses and a final review by the general manager. When a problem is found we coach the supervisor that rated the employee. If an evaluation is potentially problematic (poor performance or issues in the work relationship) we offer to have HR participate in the evaluation meeting as a neutral third party. (Also, any employee can request that HR be in the eval meeting, as well). Because we are small we can do it that way. Even so, it takes a lot of work! But I would not want to work for a company that did not evaluate my performance.