Human Resources
Painless Performance Appraisals
By James E. Mittler, CMC
Mar 1, 2004, 11:12

Painless Performance Appraisals

How Progressive Companies Manage their Employees Effectively

By James E. Mittler, CMC 

Is it possible?  How can conducting a performance appraisal session be painless?  Who is he trying to kid?  The answers are “yes,” “by starting out correctly” and “no one.”  This issue of The CEO Partner Series will explore the world of performance appraisal and hopefully give you a process to make this a much less daunting and more productive process – a process that will lead to greater performance and profitability.

First, when asked my opinion of performance appraisal I quickly rename the process “Performance PLANNING and appraisal” to emphasize the fact that this should be just one of many tools in a managers quiver, not a punitive and unpleasant obligation of managers.  Also, when this approach is used, the process becomes motivational rather than argumentative. 

What I typically hear from managers and employees alike is a general disregard for the current state of performance appraisal systems in use today.  Many complain that the “appraisal sessions” become adversarial or negotiating sessions where managers and employees come together to finalize a form that is required by human resources before a salary action can be processed.  In this scenario, the manager typically tells the employee that they did “OK” and the employee tries to recall and relate to his or her manager each and every good or outstanding thing that they did during the performance period in the hope of getting the overall performance ranking improved so they can be eligible for a larger salary increase.  Or, in another scenario, the manager writes the appraisal so that it will justify the level of salary increase that he or she has already decided that the employee deserves.  Depending on the amount of divergence between the employees’s self perception and the manager’s ability to recall the last twelve months of performance, this process can be very much less than pleasant.

To avert this unpleasant experience some companies have taken up the “360° Evaluation Method” that solicits input from subordinates, peers, customers, and managers on a standard set of criteria.  In my opinion, there is nothing inherently wrong with this approach for certain positions.  In other cases, it may be hard for peers or customers (internal or external) to really know how the employee is performing given a limited number of interactions with the employee over the previous year.  Additionally, does this process absolve the manager from at least part of one of his management responsibilities, and is that what we want to happen?

To me, one of the more interesting facts is that employees want to “know how they are doing.”  I can’t begin to tell you how many times, both as a consultant and human resource manager, I have had employees come up to me and beg “why won’t my manager just tell me how I am doing?”  So, why do we as managers have such a hard time providing timely and accurate feedback and performance appraisals?  Fortunately, I have decided not to try to put on my mystic hat and divine a Carnac the Magnificent answer to this question and let you decide why you personally have a problem with the process.  Rather, let’s spend the next few minutes looking at a process that should render the dreaded performance appraisal session at least neutral if not positive.

I believe that there are two parts of the “Performance PLANNING and appraisal” process that are critical to success.  First, there must be an agreement on the duties and responsibilities of the position and next there must be consensus on what will be acceptable performance and how will that performance be observed or measured.  Let’s look at each of these in a little more detail.

• Job Duties or Responsibilities:  I personally prefer to clearly define for the employee what his or her responsibilities are and then allow them to determine how best to complete or accomplish their responsibilities.  This, I feel, allows and encourages the employee to figure out the best way to achieve accountabilities which in turn leads to more productivity and profitability.  Who better than the person performing the job to know the best way to achieve the desired end result? 
  
  An example might be an accounts receivable clerk who is told that it is their responsibility to insure that all receivables are posted by the end of the next business day.  If this is the objective and with today’s computer power then performance measurement is simply a matter of listing how often this measure was met.  This process also allows the clerk to determine how to proceed to meet the objectives rather than dictating all of the process steps.
  
  Another example, that I do not particularly agree with, might be the classic Nordstrom’s “we will accept any return” policy where associates have actually refunded money on merchandise purchased at a competitor’s store.  The clerk was exceeding expectations based on the company policy but I don’t necessarily think they were being fiscally responsible.  Maybe a more appropriate policy would be to “treat the customer fairly.”
  
  What about the case where you have a lower level position and feel that the actions must be defined for the employee.  I still believe that “Performance Planning” works and works well.  Consider a shipping clerk or mail room clerk for example where the manager can simply outline the duties step by step and then assign acceptable performance standards to those actions, e.g. pick up the mail at the Post Office by 9:00 AM, sort and deliver the mail to all internal departments by 10:30 AM, pick up supply orders from all departments by noon of each day, etc. Again, performance appraisal now simply becomes a matter of codifying how often the standards were met or missed.
  
  For higher level positions the process is probably even easier given the more responsibility and accountability the incumbents enjoy.  So, a recruiter might have an objective of filling open requisitions within X days of receipt.  Again, the actual evaluation of performance becomes tallying results against standards and no one, not the employee or the manager, should be surprised by the results.
  
  
• Next, consensus on the standards.  Is having the mail delivered by 10:30 AM possible?  Does the employee agree that this is an achievable standard on most days?  Likewise, for the recruiter, should there be different number of “days open” for clerical, staff, and similar relatively easy to fill positions and other hard to fill positions like information systems jobs?  It doesn’t really matter, what is important is the fact that (1) setting the standards has occurred before or right at the start of the measurement period, (2) you and your employee have discussed and agreed on both the measure and the standard by which they will be measured, and (3) both you and your employee can periodically check on their performance during the measurement period.

So, to summarize, while “Performance Appraisal” may never be a highly enjoyable management responsibility “Performance PLANNING and appraisal” can and should be a highly effective management and motivational tool in your quiver or tool kit.  It should also be a tool that helps you improve individual and group performance leading to enhanced departmental and overall company performance and profitability.  Enjoy the new approach and painless performance appraisals.

© Copyright 2003, J.E. Mittler & Company.  All rights reserved.