Once A Dreaded Conversation, The Performance Review Has Now Become Downright Confusing
Ah, performance reviews. These started with the noble goal of assessing an employee's contributions and providing feedback for improvement and were meant to be a dialogue—a chance for employees to learn how they could enhance their skills and performance. Yet, over time, this process has often become a tool for managers to exert control.
Inconsistencies in performance reviews have grown more pronounced recently. Employees frequently receive mixed messages about their performance, leading to confusion and frustration. When managers’ reviews clash with employees’ self-assessments or peer feedback, it creates a disconnect that is hard to bridge. This inconsistency not only demoralizes employees but also leads to a decline in productivity and client satisfaction. When employees feel unappreciated and uncertain about their performance, they are less likely to invest their full effort into their work, resulting in poorer service and outcomes, and overall toxic work environments.
To address these issues, transparency in performance reviews is crucial. One effective solution is to conduct reviews more frequently, ideally four times a year, aligning with each fiscal quarter. This regularity helps keep feedback current and relevant, reducing the likelihood of surprises during the annual review. Frequent reviews also provide more opportunities for managers and employees to discuss progress and adjust goals as needed, fostering a continuous improvement mindset.
Clear and transparent communication about company changes is another essential element. Employees should be kept informed about significant shifts in company policy, strategy, or expectations. When employees understand the broader context of their work, they can align their efforts more effectively with company goals. Transparency in communication builds trust and ensures that everyone is on the same page, reducing confusion and misalignment.
Empathy also plays a pivotal role in enhancing the performance review process. Managers should be attentive to the challenges employees face, both at work and in their personal lives (if they so mention). By showing genuine concern and support, managers can help alleviate stress and create a more supportive work environment. Empathetic managers are more likely to foster loyalty and motivation among their team members, leading to better performance and job satisfaction.
Approachability between reviews is another key aspect. Managers who maintain an open-door policy and encourage ongoing dialogue help employees feel supported and valued. When employees know they can approach their managers with concerns or questions at any time, it strengthens the manager-employee relationship and promotes a culture of open communication.
The most critical element, however, is ensuring that both managers and employees have a shared understanding of expectations. Clear, constructive discussions about performance goals and how to achieve them are essential. When employees know exactly what is expected of them and how they can meet those expectations, they are more likely to succeed. Managers should provide specific, actionable feedback that employees can use to improve their performance.
Research supports these methods. Frequent reviews have been shown to improve employee performance by providing regular feedback and opportunities for adjustment. Transparent communication builds trust and engagement, which are critical for high performance and job satisfaction. Empathetic leadership fosters a supportive work environment, enhancing employee well-being and productivity. Clear expectations and constructive feedback help employees understand their roles and how to succeed, leading to higher performance and greater job satisfaction.
Improving transparency in performance reviews can transform them from a source of stress into a tool for growth and motivation. Conducting reviews more frequently, communicating changes clearly, showing empathy, remaining approachable, and ensuring shared expectations are all strategies that can lead to better performance, higher productivity, increased profits, and greater client satisfaction. By embracing these practices, managers can create a more positive, productive, and supportive work environment, ultimately benefiting both employees and the organization.
Sources:
Buckingham, Marcus, and Ashley Goodall. Nine Lies About Work: A Freethinking Leader’s Guide to the Real World. Harvard Business Review Press, 2019.
Rock, David, and Beth Jones. "Why Feedback Rarely Does What It’s Meant To." Harvard Business Review, 2015.
"The Impact of Clear Communication on Employee Performance." Business Management Daily, 2020.
Goleman, Daniel. Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter More Than IQ. Bantam Books, 1995.
Porath, Christine, and Christine Pearson. "The Price of Incivility." Harvard Business Review, 2013.
Kluger, Avraham N., and Angelo DeNisi. "The Effects of Feedback Interventions on Performance: A Historical Review, a Meta-Analysis, and a Preliminary Feedback Intervention Theory." Psychological Bulletin, vol. 119, no. 2, 1996, pp. 254–284.
London, Manuel. Job Feedback: Giving, Seeking, and Using Feedback for Performance Improvement. Psychology Press, 2003.
Brown, Brené. Dare to Lead: Brave Work. Tough Conversations. Whole Hearts. Random House, 2018.
Dutton, Jane E., and Emily Heaphy. "The Power of High-Quality Connections." Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline, Berrett-Koehler, 2003.
Locke, Edwin A., and Gary P. Latham. A Theory of Goal Setting and Task Performance. Prentice Hall, 1990.