“You decide,” I said. “You decide what you want to improve on.”
The class had just completed a survey, looking at strengths and weaknesses.
“You decide, if you would like to focus on and improve an area of weakness. Or you may decide to focus on and improve an area of strength.
“Correcting a weakness only creates a mediocre performance. Building on a strength creates mastery. You decide what you want to improve upon.” -TF
“I don’t think it’s me,” Marion repeated.
“You are angry at the person who gave you the negative feedback and you would like to ignore the feedback,” I confirmed.
“Besides, even it were true about me, I can’t change, that’s just not me. I couldn’t do it. Out of the question. I don’t see how anyone could do that.”
I looked at Marion. Without a word. Silence.
“But if you could change, what would you do first?” I asked. -TF
Marion’s bottom lip protruded. If she was eleven years old, I would have sworn she was pouting.
“I think I know who said that,” she announced.
“Is it important?” I asked.
“Well, I think they have a chip on their shoulder and this evaluation was just a chance to vent, to make me look bad.”
“Marion, there are positive things in this evaluation, and there are negative things here. You like the positive stuff, but you don’t believe the negative stuff.”
“Well, I think this person has an agenda. I don’t think it’s me,” she continued to protest.
“Do you think that is part of the problem?” -TF
It’s been a great week with a number of comments posted about Performance Appraisals. My bias is, absolutely, it is the responsibility of the Manager to make judgments about the effectiveness of each team member.
Many of my clients have found a 360 degree approach helpful, so much so, that we were asked to create a web-based application to ensure confidentiality. It allows for perspectives from multiple points of view and provides a platform for a very frank discussion. Here’s the way it works.
I usually allow the subject to select approximately fifty percent of the respondents to the survey, then as the Manager, I backfill the other fifty percent of respondents.
Once the surveys are collected and confidentially compiled by the website, I print a copy for subject and schedule the conversation. I use a highlighter to mark comments that are similar from one respondent to the next. An isolated observation may not mean much, but two similar comments get my attention and three or more similar comments might mark a trend.
Then we talk. At the conclusion of our conversation, I ask the subject to write up three things they commit to start doing and three things they commit to stop doing.
If you would like to see how this works for your team, you can try one out at the following link.
“Our company has adopted something called Management by Objectives. MBO they call it,” Sara reported.
“And why did your company adopt that strategy?” I asked.
“There were some who said that our appraisal system was too subjective, that it needed to be measurable. So everyone had to sit down and make up some objectives.”
“And why do you think your company made that decision?”
“Some of the managers were uncomfortable making judgments about a team member’s performance. There were squabbles, disagreements and the whole thing turned into a big distraction.”
“And how is MBO working out for you?”
“Well, it has just as many downsides as the old system,” Sara replied. “Some people get so focused on their own Objectives, they forget about the other people they work with. Cooperation gets stopped dead in its tracks. And sometimes the Objectives are not really in the control of the team member. We seem to spend more time talking about how unfair the system is than we do about improving individual effectiveness.”
“So, what makes you most unhappy about the performance appraisal process?” I asked.
Ben winced, “I really hate the whole process. It’s like my Manager gets to play God for a day and make a singular judgment about my value as a person. In many cases, he’s not in a position to really observe my behavior, and sometimes, he just comes up with the wrong conclusion. He just doesn’t have all the facts.”
“So, sometimes, your Manager is just plain wrong?”
“I have never really said it that way, but, in a nutshell that’s it.”
“Has your Manager ever tried to get your side of the story?”
Ben sat back, up straight. “You know, yes, he did, but it was almost underhanded. He came up with this self evaluation form, where I had to evaluate my own performance.”
“That sounds like a good idea, but I gather you’re not too wild about the result?”
“You’re not kidding. Here’s what he said. If I put something down and he agreed with it, then we didn’t need to talk about it. But if I put something down and he didn’t agree, then he would tell me where I was wrong. It’s almost like I was tricked into going first.”
“What do you hate about performance appraisals?” I asked, gazing into a classroom full of rolling eyes. The snickers and muffled laughter hinted that I struck a chord.
Each table created responses that sounded like these:
If you are a regular reader of Dilbert, you can come up with another hundred observations. The reason they are funny is that they most accurately describe the truth.
So, if we were to create an appraisal system that addresses these issues, what elements would we include? -TF
From the Ask Tom mailbag:
Question:
This is the time of year when I’m expected to conduct annual performance reviews on my engineering staff. For the most part it’s a positive experience because I have a good group. It’s a part of my job that I really don’t look forward to though, since there are some people who will be disappointed with my evaluation. I’m looking for ways that would make this process more objective to eliminate any perception of personal bias. Do you have any suggestions or procedures for conducting these discussions that could help?
Response:
Before you can determine an appropriate format for a performance appraisal, you first must determine your purpose.
Temper your consideration with the research findings of Dr. Edward Deming related to performance appraisals. “Those efforts that focus on improving the attentiveness, carefulness, speed, etc., of individual workers—without changing the systems, processes, and methods–constitute a low-yield strategy with negligible short-term results.”
I would concur with Dr. Deming, that if you are conducting annual performance appraisals “just because,” then it is likely a waste of your time.
So, over the next couple of days, we will explore this slippery slope. Here are some purposes we will talk about.
Each of these purposes is a conversation, but a different conversation, with a different format to get there. -TF
__
Our next Leadership program begins February 27 in Fort Lauderdale. For more information, visit www.workingleadership.com.
“In what way can we, as managers, deliver negative feedback, without triggering the fight, flight or freeze response?” I asked.
Patrick shrugged. “I know when I have to do that, it sounds critical, but I just don’t know how to make it sound any better. I have tried that sandwich thing where I start with something positive, then criticize the person, then end with something positive.
“But, they know I am making up the positive parts just so I can slide in the criticism. They are smart. They know the game. Sometimes, it just makes the person angrier.”
“Patrick, I want to talk about words. We understand the intent of negative feedback, and we have to find the words. Words mean things.
“I want to change the pronoun. Criticism uses the pronoun you.
You didn’t do that right.
If you would do it this way, it would be better.
“To a rebellious child (state of mind), you sounds like a critical parent. Even if it is a statement of fact or said in a nurturing tone of voice, you sounds like a critical parent and invites more rebellion.
“I want to change the pronoun to I.
I need help with this.
I am seeing this process a different way.
I want to speed things up here.
I would like to change this.
In what way can we make this better?
“This one simple change invites a different person into the conversation. Do you know why?” -TF
“But, I just told you that my people are competent,” Emily protested. “They have been working on the line for several years.”
“Yes, they are competent at the task, but not competent at accuracy and speed,” I explained. “I used to work in an accounting firm. When I started, I thought I was great at adding up numbers. And I was. I was extremely competent at adding numbers (after all, I did manage to graduate from the second grade). But I was incompetent at accuracy and speed.
“Never in my life, was I taught to error-check a column of numbers by adding the column twice and comparing the totals. That practice had never occurred to me. And if it had occurred, I would have immediately concluded that it would take twice the time to add the numbers twice. Logic told me so.
“I had to learn a new skill. I had to become competent at using an adding machine without looking. I never did it before, because I couldn’t.
“Before, I would add numbers up with an occasional mistake. Now, I add them up twice in less time, virtually error-free.
“Your people on the line are competent at the task, but not competent at accuracy and speed.”
Emily was silent. Finally she spoke, “Okay, I think I get it. But I am not sure what to do. How do I bring up their competence in accuracy and speed?”
“First, we are going to have to count some things. Meet me back here tomorrow and we will take the next step.” -TF