- In some professions, the job market is so bad that replacing someone can take more than a year. So why risk giving a mediocre employee feedback and risk his/her leaving the organization?
- Generally, managers write something in their evaluation, verbally express something else, and think something entirely different. E.g.- Naomi, I appreciate the effort you made to improve your writing skills. (said). Naomi gets a 5/5 on communication skills because this will get her a bonus (written). “Naomi is 65 years old, and cannot communicate in English. This won’t change (thoughts).”
- Feedback sessions promote so much anxiety that learning is very rare and playing defense is very common.
- Feedback/Evaluation sessions are basically seen as “feeding the HR beast”. And as such, they are often fudged.
- There is no rational to evaluate performance all at once. It is simply too much information to receive. Learning requires a far different context to be effective.
What should replace feedback sessions?
- Mediocre employees are a great asset in many areas. Not everyone needs to improve. That awareness could mitigate the need to shove feedback down every employee’s throat. Leave well enough alone.
- Managers and their staff should have ongoing dialogue about the desired versus actual level of performance on any given task, or set of tasks.
- When employees ask for some feedback, it is legitimate to give them what they are asking for.
- Assessing training needs is a good placement for some feedback, because it is a positive and concrete step to better performance in some areas.
- They need not be replaced, just abolished.
Great post, Allon, on one of my favorite topics, the need to abolish annual performance reviews. Here is one of my old posts on the subject: https://learningvoyager.blogspot.com/2008/02/end-of-performance-reviews.html
Your point says it all.
“Managers and their staff should have ongoing dialogue about the desired versus actual level of performance on any given task, or set of tasks”
I worked with a company where we devised a simple program where each month, managers would sit with each employee and agree on a list of priorities, for the month ahead. They would also discuss what was and wasn’t achieved in the previous month, and why, and what support the employee may need in the month ahead.
The priorities were based on what was possible for an employee to do time wise and politics wise.
The employees loved it. The managers hated it. They soon canned it.
So it’s the managers who don’t like to give feedback. Makes perfect sense – it’s just more work for them.
Yep
No surprise here.
Best to leave things vague and then give feedback
Most feedback is groundless, often a projection, sometimes used to move unwanted employees to another department. The rigor, timing and conditions required for feedback to be effective are factors that call for a large skill set. I recall one of my psychiatrist’s questions: « What makes you think you are not developed enough and how would you know? » It made for a good session.
Levis Madore
Super de t’entendre mon ami. Moi, je n’ai pas pu répondre à cette question de ton shrink!
Demming said the same (abolish annual performance reviews) on his death’s bed.
I am still alive as of last report.
And I also say too.
You do too, probably.