Providing Effective Performance Feedback

Performance management involves an ongoing process of establishing goals, evaluating the activities undertaken to achieve those goals, as well as assessing the final outcomes within an organization. This ongoing process allows management to assess the performance of the employees within the organization and how effective the organization is in meeting their strategic goals.

The performance management process can take many forms, ranging from periodic performance reviews between the manager and subordinate to 360 degree performance appraisals which involve gathering information from varied sources such as from peers, subordinates of the individual being assessed and maybe even from external clients. Typically, these performance reviews are conducted on a formal basis whereby the manager will meet with the subordinate on a periodic basis to assess the performance over that period and to provide feedback to the subordinate. The feedback component of the performance review process is very important as it provides subordinates with information regarding the areas in which they meet expectations or excel as well as areas where they may require further development. These provide advice and guidance for improving their performance. When conducted properly, this feedback process can serve as a source of encouragement and motivation.

With this in mind, it is critical for organizations to provide effective feedback during their performance review processes. This is done by providing specific feedback on behaviours that can be changed so as to improve performance. General feedback regarding possible negative behaviours would likely undermine the confidence of the employee and may cause the employee to become more defensive. Thus it would be more effective to provide examples of ideal behaviour that would help to improve performance. It is also important to maintain the confidence levels of the employee by providing them with support and encouragement in their capacity to improve and meet their potential.

Another point to keep in mind for performance reviews is to ensure that the process is not directed at criticizing the employee. It should focus on problem solving and identifying potential solutions in a collaborative manner. In this way, the employee will not feel that they are being criticized on his or her job performance thus enabling both parties to have a discussion to identify possible ways for that performance to be improved. Even when covering performance issues, it is very important to treat employees with respect so that they do not feel that they are being personally criticized.

Although performance reviews are commonly conducted formally on a periodic basis, the inclusion of informal performance reviews can be of considerable benefit. This allows the managers and subordinates to meet on a more frequent basis to discuss their ongoing processes, identify performance issues and provide advice regarding potential solutions. This can be especially useful for employees dealing with new duties and responsibilities when feedback is provided in a timely manner and immediate remedial solutions can be explored instead of waiting for the formal performance review period when such feedback may not be as urgent or relevant.
These are just some suggestions whereby organizations can help to mitigate some of the stigma and negative public perceptions that are widely held regarding performance reviews. In addition, the motivation benefits that are associated with providing effective feedback during performance reviews can improve both individual and organizational performance.

If you are interested in using an online and validated 360 Performance Framework and Appraisal System, have a look at the Saville Consulting 360 Appraisal System at http://www.psyasia.com/360_performance_appraisal.php

Rating Scales in Performance Appraisal

There are several techniques which can be used as a method of performance appraisal. Some traditional techniques involve using critical incident methods, graphic rating scales and ranking methods. Some modern techniques involve 360 degree performance appraisal, assessment centers, behaviorally anchored rating scales and using self appraisal.

 Rating scales are a very structured method. This involves rating an employee on a scale which ranges from ‘poor’ to ‘excellent’ performance. The employee is assessed on this scale based on their performance or traits which are considered relevant to the job. For example, attributes such as punctuality, initiative, creativity and excellent knowledge in programs, such as Photoshop might be crucial to a role such as graphic designing.  This method provides a structured and standardized way of evaluating performance and comparison between employees can be made easily. Rating scales are easy to interpret for both, the appraiser and the appraisee and is a very popular method.

It is very important to ensure that the traits and the competencies which the individual is evaluated against are clearly relevant to the job.  For example, if the employees performance is not included in the selected traits, then their value to the organization might not be reflected. Some problems regarding interpretation might also occur. The perceptions/steretypes an appraiser has of someone can be reflected either negatively or positively in the appraisal, and we might basically see in others what we want to see in them. For example, if a supervisor believes that an employee is good (halo effect), then they might ignore all the evidence which is against that individual. Instances such as showing up late might be ignored, or excuses for bad performance might occur. In the same way a supervisor might form a bad impression of someone (horn effect) and be more hard in their assessment and might even ignore evidence of good performance.  The halo and horn effect can have huge implication on the appraisal process.

 Perceived meaning on the selected traits on the rating scales can also be problematic if it is not clear. For example, if a competency, such as “initiative” might be perceived to an employee as reporting problems to a supervisor. However, another person might express this trait as not reporting problems and might see this as being too dependent and therefore lacking in initiative. It is important to ensure that the language on the rating scales is clear, and factors such as “good” and “well done” might mean different things to different people.

Rating errors might also occur. This is because some people might deliberately avoid giving a bad rating to others because of the repercussions of it. In all performance appraisal meetings individuals should be encouraged to respond honestly because it is reflective on their performance and is designed to help them and the organization as a whole.