Abolishing performance ratings not without risk

Published on

Here's some interesting research insight into the perils of abandoning performance ratings.

The thinking tends to be that imposing performance ratings will be counterproductive, reinforce stereotypes, encourage the idea that managers only have to have performance conversations once a year and that the annual performance appraisal system is so time consuming. The obvious answer, abandon it. Hmmm, seems that may not be the answer. Too often, and perhaps not surprisingly, the result is that, instead of encouraging a continuing discussion about performance, no discussion takes place at all or, if it does, the employee does not understand what s/he is being told.

Sadly, the report concludes, most managers are not skilled enough to deliver clear, meaningful messages, without some structure.

Maybe an answer is to keep some structure but also give those managers some training in providing effective feedback - it is, arguably, the most important part of their job after all.

It was the companies who removed ratings and made the review process less formal that ran into trouble. When the process was stripped of all formality, managers just skipped it. Leaving employees in the dark about how they’re doing.

Related Articles

How to have a productive conversation across generations – trans inclusive language

Guest blogger, Amelie Clifford, explains how the generation gap can be closed by taking time to ask questions

SRA code of conduct for firms: What do the new SRA rules mean for you?

How could the new SRA rules around workplace culture impact your law firm? Here’s how to minimise your risk of non-compliance…

Conducting investigations: a reflection on ITV and Philip Schofield

The recent news involving ITV and Philip Schofield has drawn parallels to some of the difficult decisions we help clients make around investigations.
No items found.