The 10 Sins of Performance Appraisers

Performance evaluation—it’s hard to get it right, but, unfortunately, it’s easy—and expensive— to get it wrong. We’ve identified the 10 most common mistakes of managers and supervisors who conduct performance appraisals. We call them the “10 Sins.”

Sin #1. Failure to set meaningful goals:

“Well, Sandy, I think we did fairly well this year, eh?”

“Tracy, I was sort of hoping you’d make more progress this year.”

Evaluation is difficult when there aren’t clear, measurable goals. Many experts recommend the S-M-A-R-T approach to setting goals. That means goals should be:

• Specific
• Measurable
• Achievable
• Relevant
• Time bound

Sin #2. Failure to manage goals through the evaluation period:

“So, Sally, another year, another appraisal. Let’s see how we did. Hmmm. Goal 1 was abandoned when corporate changed directions. Goal 2 got taken over by marketing, Goal 3 was unnecessary with the new software, Goal 4 got pushed over into next year, and Goal 5 depended on goal 4.”

Things can change during the evaluation period, and if you don’t address the changes, you may wind up at the end of the period with a set of great goals that are no longer relevant. This commonly happens when equipment or technology makes a job obsolete, the company abandons a project, or new priorities are set.

Especially if the evaluation period is a year, it’s important to review the goals and status against them at least every quarter. If most or many of the original goals are no longer relevant, restate or create some new ones.

Sin #3. Failure to discuss performance at various times during the evaluation period:

“I know this may come as a surprise, but, unfortunately, your rating is ‘unsatisfactory.’”

A performance ranking shouldn’t be a surprise or a shock to the employee being appraised. Regularly measure progress against goals . If performance is unsatisfactory, give the employee a chance to improve. It’s pretty silly to let an employee underperform for a whole year and then spring the news at the appraisal meeting.

HR budget cuts? Let us help. HR.BLR.com is your one-stop solution for all your HR compliance and training needs. Take a no-cost, no-obligation trial and get a complimentary copy of our special report Critical HR Recordkeeping—From Hiring to Termination. It’s yours—no matter what you decide.

Sin #4. Failure to be honest:

“Alex, your rating for this period is ‘satisfactory.’” (The manager says, thinking “Actually, Alex’s performance was worse than poor, but I think giving this rating will help it to improve.”)

“Good work this period, Patricia.” (The manager says, thinking, “It wasn’t anywhere near good, but if I tell her so, she’ll quit and I’ll lose the headcount”)

“Your work was OK this period.” (The manager says, thinking, “I think he knows that ‘OK’ means ‘terrible.’”)

Managers and supervisors tend to avoid unpleasant confrontations and they don’t want to have to tell an employee that he or she is subpar. So they equivocate and give a “‘satisfactory” rating to a “poor” employee. This sends the wrong message to the employee—who will surely assume that all is well—and can come back with a vengeance in court. Eventually, you’re going to terminate that employee. He or she will claim that the termination was because of discrimination, but you will say, “No, no, it was because of poor performance.” And then the opposing attorney will pull out that “satisfactory” performance rating and ask you, “Is this your signature?” and then the attorney will ask you to read the definition of “satisfactory.”  You’re done for.

By the way, it’s easier to deliver bad news when there are clear standards; if they are not met, just say so; the facts will speak for themselves.

Finally, don’t think that any employee is going to think that “OK” means other than “good” or “excellent.”

Sin #5. Statements too vague:

“Rafael, your work could use improvement.”

“Let’s tighten things up, shall we?”

“I’m making a note here that we talked about your performance.”

“Jay, I’m going to just spell it out—you’re lazy.”

Again, because of the desire to avoid unpleasantness, managers and supervisors will often write something on performance evaluations like “needs improvement.” That’s too vague—Does it mean the employee did a great job, but there’s always room for a little improvement, or does it mean that the employee did a terrible job?

Or how about a note to file: “Talked to Sally about her performance.” (Was that to tell her how exceptional her performance was?)

And then we have judgment words like “lazy.” Again, too vague. Offer documentation and give specific examples of the unacceptable behavior.

Find out what the buzz is all about. Take a no-cost look at HR.BLR.com, solve your top problem, and get a complimentary gift.

Sin #6. For corrective situations, failure to clarify that “significant” and “sustained” improvement is required:

“Paul, we need to see improvement or there will be repercussions.”

“If your work doesn’t improve, I can’t predict what will happen next.”

So, the new year begins and the worker does improve—a little—and only for a short time. But he or she did improve, just as asked. Make sure that whenever you ask for improvement you define what that would consist of, and that it must be sustained.

Sin #7. Gaming the system:

“John’s work is just OK, to be sure, but I need to give him a big raise to keep him, so he gets an ‘excellent.’” 

“I can’t stand Sandy, but I can’t transfer him unless he has a high rating; let his next manager deal with him.”

This is gaming the system, giving inaccurate ratings for some reason outside the performance appraisal realm. As we have mentioned, this is always going to lead to trouble, and probably very expensive trouble.

Sin #8. Failure to take performance appraisal seriously:

“I’ve got real work to do, and here’s this stack of appraisals I have to get through.”

Got to get these performance appraisals in. Good … good … good …good. Done.”

One would hope that managers would look at the appraisal process as an important opportunity to improve the performance of the department, to help employees to develop, and to give credit where it is due. But some view appraisals as an onerous chore.  That’s unfortunate. Not only will that manager lose the opportunity to improve performance and recognize hard work, but he or she is likely setting up a situation that an eager lawyer will jump on.

Sin #9. Failure to be consistent across department and organization or playing favorites:

“Jim’s performance isn’t that great, but he’s my kind of guy.”

“Judy is a great worker, but her husband has a good job; I think the higher rating goes to Steve even though his work isn’t as good as hers.”

“Jamie is clearly the better producer, but if Tracy doesn’t get the high rating, Tracy will whine and complain; Jamie will just take it, so Tracy gets the high rating.”

Within the department or across the organization, if ratings are inconsistent, there are going to be complaints, morale problems, and eventually lawsuits. If the inconsistency is blatant, for example, if members of a protected class are consistently rated lower, that’s setting up for a lawsuit, especially if the above-mentioned sins of vague goals and “dishonest” evaluations are present.

Sin #10. Failure to document carefully:

“They want me to write this stuff down, but I’m busy, and I’ll remember it.”

If there is ever a court case or charge, remember that it will likely be 2 to 5 years after the event that proceedings occur. Without clear contemporaneous documentation, even if all the players are still employed at your organization, it will be difficult to remember what exactly was said, and it will be very difficult to convince a jury.

Ok, that’s our 10 sins of performance appraisal. Avoid them, and you’ll likely avoid a lot of heartache, hassle—and expensive lawsuits.

Source: HR Daily Adviser