How to Keep Good Employees with Employee Performance Evaluation Form

How to Keep Good Employees with Employee Performance Evaluation Form

You can implement a simple yet powerful system to keep your most important asset in your business- your good employees.  You can do this with the help of an employee performance evaluation form.  Here’s how.

Set Performance Goals and Objectives

You should be able to clearly communicate to your employees your business’s goals and objectives.  In line with this and together with your employees, you should set employee performance goals and objectives that are well defined and understood by both parties.  Everyone should know what their respective roles are, what are expected of them, and what they should do to contribute to overall productivity and profitability.

Document the Goals, Objective and Expectations

After defining the goals, objectives, and performance expectations, you should create an effective documentation system where performance metrics are in place.  This will establish standards and professionalize the employee performance evaluation system.  It will also make it easier for both management and employees to communicate any performance related issues.

Use the Employee Performance Evaluation Form

The employee performance evaluation provides both management and employees a picture of how well they are meeting performance expectations and what can be done to improve their performance.  Using the employee performance evaluation form enables the business to maintain an accurate documentation of the evaluation process.   It tells a business how the employees are performing at the specified time covered by the evaluation as well as where the employees are headed with regards to their performance and contribution to the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the business.

Posted in Employee Performance Evaluation | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Performance Management Gone Haywire

Performance Management Gone Haywire

When you ask employees about their impressions of Performance Management processes, the answer is invariably negative or neutral. It’s not often that the process is positively endorsed by those who use it. So where are we going wrong?
 
As managers, we know we need a management system of some kind for all the components of performance:

• getting people to work on things that will help the business achieve it’s goals
• identifying and overcoming obstacles that might prevent success
• understand and checking our progress regularly
• giving people a forum for talking about what they are doing and how it’s going
• providing the appropriate checks and balances
• recognising and rewarding performance

I believe there are 5 fundamental reasons why Performance Management is not viewed positively.

1. Reviewers don’t have the skills or confidence to give feedback appropriately
Giving feedback constructively is a learned skill. Unfortunately for their team members, many managers haven’t had any training or support in learning this critical skill. So when it comes to review time, feedback is either:
1. blunt and delivered with no thought for the impact or consequence,
2. not provided at all because the manager wants to avoid disagreement or conflict, or
3. is given in such a wishy washy way that the reviewee actually misses the fact they are being given feedback!

This is one of the most critical capabilities a manager can have, with far-reaching positive or negative consequences. Providing ongoing coaching and support should be part of the approach to managing performance.

2. Employees don’t see Performance Management (PM) as a 2 way street
Is PM something that is ‘done’ to employees, or is it jointly owned with equal responsibility between the reviewer and the reviewee?

Imagine a review session where the employee turns up having evaluated their own performance, provided examples of how and when they achieved each objective, had references from other people about their attitude and behaviour, and already had drafted some challenges they wanted to work on in the next 12 months. When ownership for the process lies with the employee, this is the result.

Getting to this stage takes time. The business needs to consistently communicate expectations and help the manager’s adapt to the new positioning. Instead of PM being viewed a bureaucratic process over which they have no control, employees own their own performance and contribute equally to the discussion about performance levels and results achieved.

3. The annual review is the prime focus
If PM consists only of an annual or bi-annual review, the business is really missing the point. Reviews are useful checkpoints, but PM occurs 365 days a year. When review time comes around there should be no surprises. And I mean none. If there is, the manager is not doing their job effectively. Any performance issues, or comments about achievement, need to be given as they arise, not saved up for discussion 3 months later in a review.

On this basis, the review becomes more of a confirmation of what each party already knows. This shouldn’t take long to go through, leaving plenty of time to discuss development needs and new opportunities (see next point).

4. Not enough attention is given to the future
In many cases the entire review is spent dissecting the previous 12 months. Objectives and goals do need to be valuated and measured – don’t get me wrong – but the real value of a review lies in the discussion about the future.

What skills will the employee need to develop to become even more effective in their job? What work-related challenges can they get involved in that will grow them beyond where they are today? How can the business utilize their strengths in other areas? What gaols do they want to set themselves over the next 12 months? How can the manager help them achieve these things?

It’s this focus on future development and opportunities that energizes people, makes them feel valued and keeps them engaged with the business.

In an ideal world, reviewing past performance and discussing future skills and opportunities will take equal time in a review.

5. There is no follow-up
This is the credibility killer. All throughout the performance year, managers will make commitments to take actions and follow-up. If this doesn’t happen, the whole process loses integrity. Once employees experience this firsthand, it’s a long road back.

Commitments must be upheld, and managers and employees equally need to be accountable for their part in this.

Getting employees to think about Performance Management as a positive process that adds value is the goal. This only happens when the managers have the right skills, the business adopts an ongoing approach that consists of much more than annual reviews, when commitments are made and kept, and when employees own the process equally with managers.

Megan Tough is director of complete potential, a leadership and HR consultancy based in Sydney, Australia.


At complete potential we understand people – what engages them, what encourages them to perform, and what drives them away. With over 20 years experience working on HR issues in business, our job is to help you make the most of your investment in people. To learn more visit www.completepotential.com

Posted in Performance Management | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Making Performance Management Perform

Making Performance Management Perform

It is important to remember that good Human Capital management is about maximising the value of each individual within a business. It’s about what motivates people, what drives improvement in their capability, what keeps them engaged and how they are treated by the business as a whole person.

One of the best ways to manage an individual, to enhance their performance and their relationship with the organisation they work for is through Performance Management. So what is Performance Management?

Many people think it is about managing someone out of the organisation.  In fact it is about optimising someone’s contribution when they are with the organisation. Leading experts, Armstrong and Baron, define it as “a process which contributes to the effective management of individuals and teams in order to achieve high levels of organisational performance. It establishes shared understanding about what is to be achieved and an approach to leading and developing people…” Basically it is about having good conversations between a manager and his/her people that helps them get clear on what is expected of them and, as importantly, how they are doing.”

This can include 1:1 meetings, giving constructive feedback to generate the right behaviours, discussing individual objectives and competencies, capturing development plans, encouraging training matched to job requirements and nurturing individual aspirations, whether they are personal or professional.
Quality of dialogue

Good Performance Management gives a business the tools to pro-actively review and discuss an individual and their contribution to the wealth of the organisation. It also gives employees a vehicle to formalise their career aspirations, obtain or give constructive feedback, and agree future aims or deliverables.  Technology can support the management of performance in an organisation by tracking meetings, objectives, agreements and development plans.  However a system alone will not deliver good Performance Management in an organisation. The quality of dialogue between a manager and their employee is critical, along with the discipline of ensuring agreements for development and feedback are followed through on.

Performance Management also needs to be set within a context i.e. that of achieving a wider company strategy, or cultural objectives, or, most basically, financial results. Anyone in the organisation should be able to link their objectives to the objectives of their organisation, which means good Performance Management enables a company to bridge the gap between their corporate objectives  – which can often seem lofty and distant from ‘the day job’ – to what employees are doing on a daily basis.

If a business is going to meet its financial targets, growth objectives and business plans, all employees must be aligned to achieve shared goals. The success of a company is based on the sum of its parts, and the way to ensure company objectives are met is through good Performance Management of the individuals inside an organisation. Each employee can then be motivated, appropriately skilled and targeted to deliver.
Implementing Performance Management

According to the CIPD, “Performance Management is difficult to implement.” The key reason they cite for this is “ownership”, as everybody in an organisation needs to play an active and enthusiastic part in the process to ensure it’s successful and effective. HR departments are often custodians of Performance Management, which ultimately impacts every employee as well as the business results, but they rarely “own” execution. Therefore line managers remain critical to the quality of the process and outcome. 

The CIPD also states that “Surveys suggest individuals and managers in organisations, with Performance Management systems, quite like it…although performance-rating often provokes hostility.” Again, this can make the process difficult; highlighting the importance of effective communication, training and change management aspects of any implementation.

HR can help provide the tools and support to make positive adoption of a Performance Management system or process easier, but they can’t force good Performance Management practices into a business. Every employee, line manager and senior manager must interact with the process and play their part to maximise the value each person can bring to the organisation as a whole.

Alexis Fox-Mills is Head of Innovation at Ceridian, the UK’s leading provider of HR and Payroll software and services.

Posted in Performance Management | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Creating An Effective Employee Performance Management System

Creating An Effective Employee Performance Management System

If your employee performance management system is not effective – in other words, your managers aren’t meeting their responsibility of getting their employee performance appraisals written, approved and delivered on time – here’s the first question to ask: What happens to the manager who doesn’t turn in all of his appraisals on time?

Too often it turns out that the answer is “Nothing,” or at least nothing sufficiently disagreeable to get the manager to act. Managers often discover that it’s easier to put up with toothless gripes from the personnel department about not getting employee performance appraisals done than actually evaluating subordinates. As a result, appraisals get pushed aside so that “real work” can be done, and your employee performance management structure is broken.

Initiating Hardball Consequences

Make sure that there are some real consequences for not getting employee performance appraisals in on time. For example, withholding salary increases until paperwork is up-to-date creates a powerful incentive for getting them done on time. This is particularly true if the human resources department has the clout to refuse making salary increases retroactive to rescue managers who just didn’t get around to submitting them on time.

No manager wants to be in the position of explaining a subordinate’s delayed salary increase to them – especially if the boost in pay is being held up simply because the manager failed to submit their employee performance appraisal on time. This strategy is called “building accountability.” It’s a tough-minded approach, but all you’re doing is insisting that managers play by the rules.

Establishing Deadlines

A gentler measure is simply to make sure that managers know exactly what they’re supposed to do, and when they’re supposed to do it with a checklist that provides key dates of the employee performance management cycle. And make it easy for them to do what you want – make sure forms and procedural instructions are readily available, and there’s someone on hand to answer the inevitable questions that arise.

Both approaches establish shared responsibilities. Not only are line managers required to get their employee performance appraisals written, but HR must make sure the employee performance management process is models for best practices. Forms should reflect the reality of people’s jobs; managers must be able to assess all of the subtle elements of both results and behaviors; training and other support must be available in a just-in-time basis; and what is expected should be made crystal clear. Without all of these elements, HR bears the lion’s share of the responsibility for not creating a system that encourages employee performance management excellence.

Sharing the Honey

But consequences aren’t the only area where HR drops the ball. We’ve talked about arranging negative consequences for those managers who don’t do what’s expected. But remember – honey influences behavior better than vinegar does. How often does HR provide positive consequences to managers who are doing a good job of meeting their employee performance appraisal responsibilities?

A simple email from an HR rep to a supervisor saying that in reviewing the employee performance appraisals she wrote, he was impressed by how seriously she took the responsibility and the fact that they were all submitted before the deadline. Copy her boss on the email, too.

Providing Gentle Reminders

It’s important to have some mechanism to remind managers when key dates are approaching. That’s one of the great advantages of online systems. Well-designed online systems greatly complement employee performance management efforts, providing managers with at-a-glance information about tasks to be completed.

For example, a dashboard screen can let them know which employee performance appraisals need to be written and when they’re due, which appraisals written by subordinate managers have been submitted and are awaiting their review and approval, and which subordinates need to submit self-appraisals or sign off after an evaluation has been written and discussed.

An online system can be set up to automatically send managers (and their subordinates) regular reminders every time an action date is approaching and email red-flag notifications if a deadline is ever missed. Finally, a good online system can track the current status of employee performance appraisal completions for different organizational units. Having this information will allow you to let the head of the sales department know that the completion percentage in his department is only 84 percent, while manufacturing and accounting are at the 100 percent level.

Lighting A Little Fire

Though HR’s role in creating an effective employee performance management system. Senior managers also own some responsibility to make sure the company’s expectations for employee performance appraisal quality and timeliness are followed.

Every senior manager should review each appraisal written by a subordinate manager before that manager reviews it with the employee. This one-over-one review procedure will ensure a level playing field, since the senior manager can make sure that all of his juniors are applying similar standards and expectations to their subordinates. He also will learn who’s taking the responsibilities of employee talent management seriously as he reviews the appraisals and sees how honestly they’re written.

Remembering the Power of Shame

Shame is a powerful motivator that is often overlooked. There’s nothing wrong with shaming managers into doing what they’re supposed to do.

How do you do it? The easiest way to make shame work for you is to ask a senior executive if he’d like to be updated on the status of employee performance appraisal completions – he will invariably say yes. (Senior executives always want to know the status of everything). That’s your license to report on exactly who has their employee performance appraisals in on time and who’s not performing.

Provide a short report beginning, “As you requested, I have listed below the current status of appraisal completions,” followed by nothing but two columns of names – one labeled “On time” and the other labeled “Overdue.” Send copies of your report to everyone on both lists. You can probably count on an immediate reaction from those managers on the overdue list to finish their appraisals and move to the list of good guys.

Again, an online system can provide executives with up-to-the-minute information about the status of all employee performance management activities without HR having to feed it to them. And senior managers can have a powerful influence of creating the environment where one hundred percent appraisal completions is the norm.

Creating Fool-Proof Accountability

At one major oil company, the CEO and his VP of HR developed an employee performance appraisal procedure that was a model of simplicity: a requirement that each manager discuss 13 open-ended questions about performance with each subordinate in March of each year.

The only writing the system required was a memo from each manager to the CEO every year no later than March 31. The memo indicates whether or not the manager had conducted all his discussions – if the discussions had not been conducted, the memo needed to explain why. And the reason had better be good, the VP-HR explained, because on April 1 the CEO picks up the phone and starts calling. “Why didn’t you do what I asked you to do?” he asks each manager who didn’t complete the performance-discussion assignment. As the VP-HR explained with a sly smile, “You don’t ever want to get that call from Roy.”

Employee performance management is a necessary tool in making sure your company’s employees are putting their best foot forward. Your managers are the catalyst for this, and they need both incentives and consequences to make sure the job’s getting done. Having a checks and balances system in place helps keep the process focused and effective.

Dick Grote has been a consultant for almost thirty years, specializing exclusively in the field of employee performance management . He has created employee performance management systems for several hundred of the world’s best known and most respected companies, including Texas Instruments, JCPenney, Miller Brewing Company, American Airlines, Macy’s, Raytheon, Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad, and Herman Miller. His company, Grote Consulting, specializes in employee performance appraisal, employee improvement and talent management. For more information about Dick Grote and Grote Consulting, visit: http://www.groteconsulting.com/

Posted in Performance Management | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Obama To Hold Performance Review With All American Workers

The President says the purpose of the performance reviews is to have a little face time to make sure we’re all on the same page going forward.
Video Rating: 4 / 5

Posted in Performance Reviews | Tagged , , , , , | 25 Comments