Most performance reviews include surprises, most of which are unpleasant. Bad experiences result when performance reviews are qualitatively rather than quantitatively based.
Even if the general areas of review are understood, the means for measuring them are not because generalities cannot be measured. How do you measure "communications, motivation, teamwork, cooperation", and other qualitative measurements? Not easily, and certainly not credibly.
Good performance reviews are based on agreed to deliverables and standards of performance and clearly defined expectations. And when they are, performance review becomes a valuable developmental tool rather than a huge source of frustration.
Surprises and disappointments will remain the fate of all those involved in performance reviews unless performance reviews are based on quantitative measures and standards of performance that have been agreed to at the beginning of the performance period.
And, quarterly performance reviews should replace the annual review because frequent evaluations encourage managers to coach their direct reports. When frequently reviewed, performance does not get very far off track without corrective action.
With such a process surprises become rare. |
