For many workers, the first month or two of the New Year can be a very anxious time because of the dreaded annual performance review that they will get from their boss (and sometimes peers). Do they all hate me? What score will I get? Will I get my promotion? Will I get fired? For managers and supervisors, there is the additional concern that they also have to measure the performance of their subordinates and teams, which might oblige them to re-assign, demote or even fire one of their co-workers. These kinds of actions can be one of the most onerous duties of a leader, especially during this time of Corona. The pandemic has not only created so much uncertainty and instability in general but it has also made accurate and fair performance appraisals even more challenging than usual as so many people have been working remotely with little or no active supervision on a regular basis. And there is another group of workers, who can be under even more pressure at this time: whatever they do to try to improve the system, many human resource professionals still have to withstand a frequent barrage of complaints from all sides: 1. Timing – “Why now? It’s the wrong time of the year. I am way too busy.” 2. Inconsistency – “Only some people actually do it. Why should I have to?” 3. Volume – “I just can’t fit in 17 requests for input on my team this week.” 4. Quality – “We just try to get them all done, but not well.” 5. Personality – “I am just not comfortable doing this kind of thing.” 6. Incompetence – “No one has trained me how to do this properly.” 7. Collegiality – “Everyone wants to be nice and avoid any potential conflict.” 8. Trust – “People don’t trust that the system is fair or private. How do you ensure anonymity?” 9. Consequences – “There are no carrots and no sticks.” So, it’s not surprising that one HR manager commented: “I just hate this time of the year and I want it to be over as soon as possible.” Some high-profile companies - including Adobe, GE and PwC - have dispensed with or drastically revamped their annual performance review process, focusing on more frequent and informal feedback throughout the year. But most organisations still see value in both the formal and informal approaches, as long as they are prepared and implemented equitably and efficiently. The easier part of the formal process should be to record what someone did and see if they met the specific objectives, forecasts and milestones that they will have ideally co-created with their managers at the beginning of the latest assessment period. Once again, Corona has made this process much more complicated as all the key metrics may have had to be modified several times. It’s more difficult, however, to evaluate how someone performed. Were they always honorable and ethical? Did they treat their co-workers with respect and honesty? How did they interact with their clients, vendors and other external counterparts? In Malawi, people ask: “You can measure the depth of the sea but what about a man’s heart?” Organisations may not be quite so philosophical or intrusive in assessing their employees but there should still be reliable ways to measure who someone really is and how they perform. American Express, the global financial services company, has been a global pioneer in developing a two-track approach to assessing the performance of anyone who supervises others: 75% of the final grade is based on their Goals and how well they have been met; 25% is on Leadership, as measured by such things as how satisfied their team is and how they develop and retain talented workers. Bonuses and promotions depend on the aggregate result. In many successful organisations, it is now impossible for a high-achiever to get away with consistently irresponsible or inappropriate actions. The ends don’t justify the means any more. One former leader said quite bluntly: “There should be no reward for being a ….!” Another way for an organization to be seen to be fair is to make sure that everyone’s performance is evaluated on a regular basis, even the CEO, president or managing director. “The measure of a man (sic) is what he (sic) does with power,” said the Greek philosopher, Plato (in the days long before many women emerged as recognized leaders). And if the power is not used in the right way, well-performing but badly behaving senior leaders may also need to be reprimanded, fired or - in some extreme cases - prosecuted. Even global leaders. As Rwanda’s President Paul Kagame has said: “You can be up there, talked about, appreciated all over the world, with people singing a lot of songs about you. But if you don’t measure up and you are not really connected with your people... it will explode in your face, no question about it.” The views expressed in this column are entirely those of the writer who can be reached at jeremy@jeremysolomons.com
