In general, I agree. Performance evaluations are one of the most common forms of fiction being written in the world today. Most of them are inflated and the idea that every six or 12 months you can take an accurate picture of a person's performance is based on a lot of assumptions.
In most cases, I think management is better off abolishing the evaluations and having supervisors deal with good and poor performance on a case by case basis. Knowing, however, that organizations will be reluctant to eliminate evaluations entirely I suggest an alternative:
The monthly evaluation.
Don't panic. I know how much supervisors loathe doing even the annual evaluation, but a monthly evaluation system has these virtues:
- You avoid surprise. Far too often, the evaluation meeting is where the supervisor empties a gunnysack of performance problems that should have been addressed earlier. A monthly evaluation forces you to sit down once a month and discuss problems while they are reasonably within memory.
- You correct problems more quickly. After all, you're not holding off for several months to discuss the situation during the performance evaluation.
- It's hard for employees to practice escape and evade. Have you ever noticed how the dead come to life three weeks before evaluation time? It is very difficult to bob and weave month after month.
- You can set interim goals for improvement. With most performance problems, this makes sense and employees are more responsive because you are not demanding miraculous improvement overnight.
- You can boost your good performers who may feel unappreciated. Too often, we pay attention to the problem employee and neglect the good one who longs for recognition. This permits us to give those strokes.
Every supervisor I've ever known who used monthly evaluations liked them. They said you put some time in up front but save a bundle of time further down the road. You have much better communication with your employees.
Try them. You'll like them.
No comments:
Post a Comment