Keeping the Annual Performance Review Positive and Productive, Part II

                As promised, here is a second slightly different format for keeping the annual performance review a positive and worthwhile experience for the individual, the manager and the organization.  This is a slightly more open approach than the one described in my last post.  Both of them, if delivered in the proper spirit, will get you a much more sustainable, positive reaction from the employee than the old fashioned finger-wagging approach.

                Let the individual know a week in advance that you are going to have the review based on the following structure.

1.       The employee will get to speak in a free, open-ended and detailed manner using the following sentence start:  “What I feel best about in my performance over the last year is…”

and/or, “I did my best work over the last year in the following areas…” 

The manager’s job during this initial piece is to listen, mirror and take notes.  This is a one-way “send”…meaning that the manager doesn’t interrupt or comment.  He or she may elicit more from the employee by using language such as, “Tell me more about that.”  Or, “Could you give me one or more specific examples of that so I understand you fully?”  This is done in a friendly, genuinely inquisitive tone.

2.       Now the manager will speak to the same issue, using the sentence start:  “What I feel best about in your performance over the last year is…” and/or  “I think you did your best work in the last year in the following areas…”  The manager should have come to the meeting with these positive observations in written form; using bullet points is sufficient. The employee’s job during this piece is also to listen, mirror and take notes.

3.       Now the employee presents self-coaching points.  He can use the following sentence start:  “If I were sitting across the table and coaching myself, my suggestions to myself about how to have a great year going forward would be as follows…”  The employee should be told in advance that all these coaching points should be phrased in a positive manner.   He should also speak to what personal resources he will have to tap to achieve this and what additional support and/or resources he will need from the manager and the organization. Self-criticism can be as negative and de-motivating as criticism from another.  Once again, the manager listens, uses “tell me more” inquisitive language, takes notes and mirrors.

4.       Now the manager presents his own coaching points to the individual.  These also should be in writing prior to the meeting in succinct form…but the manager can certainly add to them based on the exchange.  These are all framed positively.  The language looks like, “You’ve done a good job in this area.  I think you will be even more effective and productive if you add  XYZ activity” or “if you tap your team-mates more” or “if you improve your mastery of the technology” and so on.  There is a conscious intention to avoid “don’t” type negative language.  This isn’t because we think employees are wimps.  It’s because we think they are human and humans hear so many “don’t” messages when we are growing up, when we hear them as adults, they tend to trigger an unconscious childhood reaction so that we argue or withdraw.  Both of those reactions are sub-optimal for growth.  We also avoid personalizing our suggestions in the sense of telling the individual that they let us down or let their team down.  We can say, “The team needs more from you in this area…and I am confident you have the capacity to deliver.”  That’s about as personal as it should ever get.  We want to keep the conversation on accurate information based on performance stats and direct observation by other team-mates anonymously submitted (the well known 360 degree approach) and by ourselves as supervisors.  The manager should also address the issue of what personal resources the employee will have to draw upon and what additional support and/or resources the company will be able to provide to help make real the targeted improvements.

                                                                                       

5.       The meeting is completed by a collaborative effort between employee and manager to winnow through the self-coaching and management coaching points and come up with those areas of maintenance and/or improvement that will have the highest leverage in leading to the specific enhanced performance that will most benefit the team/company.  The manager records these points and after the meeting, types them up and emails them to the employee with a heading such as “Agreed Focal Points for the Coming Year for  (employee’s name).   The employee is encouraged to keep this list in a highly visible place for self-reminding.        The manager should do the same because                                                                                                                                                                 

6.       This list should be re-visited every month without fail.  Sadly, this is where a lot of managers fall down.  They “get too busy”.   It should never be acceptable to them or top management for anyone with supervisorial responsibility over people to be too busy to track them assiduously.  Changes are called for in an individual manager’s perspective or actual schedule if this happens…and pronto.

                Once again, this approach is based on a good hiring process that has brought you serious minded workers capable of honest self-appraisal and self-correction.  When you treat such people with the respect they deserve, you are far more likely to get the best of what they have to bring to their responsibilities on a sustainable basis.


               Note of appreciation:  I adapted this process from one I learned in my training at the Pasadena Institute for Relationships during my Imago training.  I'm grateful to Drs. Bruce Crapuchettes and Francine Beauvoir for having taught it and to Dr. Harville Hendrix for having created it.  It was not initially designed for workplace settings.  However, since organizations were my wheelhouse, I immediately began to apply it to the workplace with excellent results and those results have held.

C 2011 Bob Kamm

Keeping the Annual Performance Review Positive and Productive

                It is well known across the country that the annual performance review is generally dreaded by employees (and many of the managers who must execute them) and has been for decades.  Ironic, considering that so many businesses have oriented themselves towards listening closely to their customers…their external customers, that is, while continuing to turn a deaf ear to the pleas of their internal customers, the individuals who make up their workforce.  When you get consistently critical feedback about a product, service, policy or process, the odds are there is a terrific opportunity for improvement.  Why, then, has there been so little innovation in the area of the annual review?  Chalk it up to the remnants of authoritarianism from past decades and that old mentality summed up in the line, "The beatings will continue until your attitude improves."

                But I can assure you, there are some excellent alternatives to the top-down,  so-called “constructive criticism” approach that has been over-used for so long. 

                First, consider this.  Most people come to work to do a good job.  If you show them clearly what a good job looks like to you, they will strive to deliver it.  When they fall short, they will know.  They are eminently capable of self-correction.  If you have large numbers of people whom you believe are not capable of self-correction, the problem is most likely either in your perspective or in your hiring process.   You have to work awfully hard to hire a lot of people who really don’t want to do a good job and can’t self-correct.  So let’s put to rest the myth that you must be “brutally honest” with people and scare them to get them to self-correct.  That’s just inaccurate.

                Given that most people are capable of self-correction, what should a good annual performance review process look like?  Well, it should actively involve employees and elicit their take on their past year before a manager weighs in.  It should be an honest, positive conversation.  Here are is one possibility.  I’ll offer another in a future post. 

1.       Create a Self-Evaluation by making a list of the most important activities the individual in a given position must perform with consistently high competency to equate to “a good job.”  Beside each item, place two side by side lines divided by a diagonal, to look like this:  _____/_____.   The first space is for the employee to grade himself from F to A in that activity.  The second space will be for your grade for him in that same activity.  At the bottom of the page, have several lines for Comments & Commitments. 

2.       Hand this sheet to the employee two days before your meeting with her.  Ask that she grade herself in all of the areas listed, using the first blank space to the right of each. 

3.       Ask that she also write any comments she would like to make at the bottom of the page specifically about what she will bring to the coming year to either continue or improve her performance.  Ask her also to tell you what she needs from the company and you specifically as her supervisor in order to achieve those goals.  Leave the Commitment section unsigned for now.

4.       You will have your own version of the same Self-Evaluation.  You use the far right column to give your own grade to the employee on each of the key activities.

5.       When you meet, you will first ask the employee to go down his list and talk a little about why he gave himself each specific grade.  During this process, your job is to mirror him, not to make comments or observations.  So, you limit yourself to a lot of, “Ok, so you’re saying that…” and then you summarize your understanding of what he is saying.  You may be surprised to discover that most people are harder on themselves than you will be on them.  They know where they have skinned their knees and what they need to get up and move forward.  Stop at the end of the grades.  Save the comment area for later.

6.       Comparing your grades to theirs, go down your list.  Explain one by one your reasons for the grade.  Ask them to simply mirror you back and not defend themselves.  This is a positive conversation.  You avoid using negative words altogether.  With a little creativity, you’ll see how easy it is to say, “I’d like to see a little more____ in this area and I’m confident you have it to give. “  Or, rather than say, “don’t…” use language like, “I want to strongly encourage you to go in this specific direction.  It will serve you better than what you’ve been doing.”  Why do we avoid “don’t”, “no”, “should” and “shouldn’t”?  Because they tend to immediately strike the child in us and when the child hears negatives, it feels threatened and tends to shut down and not really hear what you’re saying.  So it’s simply bad technique to criticize people and expect that such a negative approach will get you self-sustaining positive results.

7.       Now ask the employee to read her comments to you about what she needs to tap in herself and what she needs more of from you and the company.  When she has read these, ask her to tell you more, to elaborate more fully.  Listen and mirror and make sure you’re really getting her.

8.       Now read your own comments and ask her to do the same—mirror you.

9.       Now talk about what you can commit to do for her in the coming year as her supervisor and agent of the company and what she can commit to.  If further discussion is necessary to come to a mutual agreement, then do it.  Don’t twist arms.  A commitment that is not made from a deep sense of free will and personal desire to do better is highly unlikely to be delivered on.

10.   Both sign the commitments, keep copies, agree to revisit on a monthly basis.

                If you execute this highly participatory process with the intended positive spirit, you will get positive results.  Generally, you will find that the employees self-grade and your grade for him are very close.  In those cases where they are not, you have a straight, honest but respectful conversation about what you need more of, what new direction should be taken.  You refrain from telling people how disappointed you are or how badly they have let the company down.  When you personalize the process like that, it makes it about you instead of the employee.  It also makes it a process driven by negative emotion. Stick to the performance issues and positive emotion.  If you are disappointed, that’s your issue.  You probably misread the employee’s capacities.   If you are more in love with their potential than their reality, you are likely to engage in the kind of criticism that will lead them to avoid you in the future and start looking for a job elsewhere. Try management by truth, truth given respectfully and cleanly, truth given with encouragement.  In the minority case in which an employee is on the verge of dismissal, it's even more important to stick to the facts and encourage the individual to dig deep down into his or her own inner resources.  "I want to be honest with you that we need more from you...and we believe you have it in you.  We will do all we can on our side to help you, but you'll have to be an active participant in this.  Otherwise, unfortunatley, we are going to have to let you go." This situation is actually the subject of a fuller future blog...so try to avoid allowing yourself to get hung up on it right now.  Remember the core truth:  most people want to do a good job and can self-correct if given the encouragement and the resources.  Management by fear or management by criticism is driven by so little understanding of human beings and such short-sightedness, it’s time to hit the delete button on it.

C 2011 Bob Kamm