A Review of Performance Reviews: Blindsiding

A vignette common during performance review season goes like this. Michelle Manager visits Sam Subordinate's cube and says, "Morning Sam, come to my office and we'll do your review." Sam is taken by surprise. Arriving together in Michelle's office, Michelle says to Sam, "Have a seat," and hands him a two- or three-page document that he's seeing for the first time. "Have a look," she says. "Tell me what you think."

Sam reads eagerly at first, but slowly realizes that, far from singing his praises, this document is an indictment. It's a list of grievances he's never heard before. Many are gross distortions and some are just plain false. His emotions take over. He feels accused, hurt, and angry.

"There's a space at the end for your signature," says Michelle. "Signing doesn't mean you agree with every little thing, it just means you've read it." Defeated, Sam signs. The document enters his personnel folder.

Sam has been blindsided. Feeling helpless, he has surrendered. His personnel record now contains yet another review filled with falsehoods and distortions.

Blindsiding was once much more common than it is today, because law is developing regarding employee rights. The law is in a primitive state, and civil suits are still the main deterrent to performance review abuses. But a consensus is emerging about appropriate processes for conducting performance reviews. Here are the basics:

Regular scheduling

Reviews of employees in good standing occur at regular intervals — quarterly, semi-annually, or, at a minimum, annually. Employees who are on notice for performance issues might be reviewed more frequently.

Fair notice

The subordinate receives fair notice of review meetings. Subordinates with heavy travel schedules are reasonably accommodated.

Written documentation

Everything of significance is captured in writing, and signed by supervisor and subordinate to indicate not agreement, but acknowledgement that the document was presented. The two parties can negotiate the content, but each can also append their own views without editing by the other.

Opportunity to prepare

The subordinate receives a A consensus is emerging about
appropriate processes for conducting
performance reviewsdraft of the document far enough in advance to allow for preparation of rebuttals or appendices. The subordinate can prepare for the review on company time, at full compensation.

No hidden standards

The review can fault the employee for failing to perform to standards only if those standards were previously documented. If a standard is revised between reviews, the employee is informed of the change, and has time to adapt to the new standard. At the next review, that revised standard applies only to employee performance during the period the standard was active.

Fairness

All standards are fairly applied to all subordinates equally, without discrimination as to race, sex, age, religion, ethnicity, or any other demographic factor.

How did you conduct you last review? Was it fair? Were any of these guidelines violated? First in this series   Top    Next Issue

Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!

Your comments are welcome

About Point Lookout

Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.

Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.

Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.

Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.

Related articles

More articles on Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness:

Making Meaning

When we see or hear the goings-on around us, we interpret them to make meaning and significance. Some interpretations are thoughtful, but most are almost instantaneous. Since the instantaneous ones are sometimes goofy or dangerous, here's a look at how we make interpretations.

How to Make Good Guesses: Tactics

Making good guesses probably does take talent to be among the first rank of those who make guesses. But being in the second rank is pretty good, too, and we can learn how to do that. Here are some tactics for guessing.

Wacky Words of Wisdom: III

Adages are so elegantly stated that we have difficulty doubting them. Here's Part III of a collection of often-misapplied adages.

Managing Hindsight Bias Risk

Performance appraisal practices and project retrospectives both rely on evaluating performance after outcomes are known. Unfortunately, a well-known bias — hindsight bias — can limit the effectiveness of many organizational processes, including both performance appraisal and project retrospectives.

Understanding Delegation

It's widely believed that managers delegate some of their own authority and responsibility to their subordinates, who then use that authority and responsibility to get their work done. That view is unfortunate. It breeds micromanagers.

See also Personal, Team, and Organizational Effectiveness and Emotions at Work for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming February 27: Brainstorming and Speedstorming: II

Recent research into the effectiveness of brainstorming has raised some questions. Motivated to examine alternatives, I ran into speedstorming. Here's Part II of an exploration of the properties of speedstorming. Available here and by RSS on February 27.

And on March 6: A Pain Scale for Meetings

Most meetings could be shorter, less frequent, and more productive than they are. Part of the problem is that we don't realize how much we do to get in our own way. If we track the incidents of dysfunctional activity, we can use the data to spot trends and take corrective action. Available here and by RSS on March 6.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenJgfDGxXAmMIrqxToner@ChacuMrCFYvzvHBggLWXoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.

Get the ebook!

Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:

• Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, USD 11.95)
• Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, USD 28.99)

Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info

Public seminars

The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power

Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.

• A recording of a program presented 6:00 PM June 29 (Eastern Time), Monthly Webinar, Technobility Webinar Series. You can earn 1.0 Category 'A' PDU by viewing this program. View this program now.