Halloween…  According to History.com:

The Celts, who lived 2,000 years ago in the area that is now Ireland, the United Kingdom, and northern France, celebrated their new year on November 1. This day marked the end of summer and the harvest and the beginning of the dark, cold winter, a time of year that was often associated with human death. Celts believed that on the night before the new year, the boundary between the worlds of the living and the dead became blurred. On the night of October 31, they celebrated Samhain, when it was believed that the ghosts of the dead returned to earth. In addition to causing trouble and damaging crops, Celts thought that the presence of the otherworldly spirits made it easier for the Druids, or Celtic priests, to make predictions about the future. For a people entirely dependent on the volatile natural world, these prophecies were an important source of comfort and direction during the long, dark winter.

That has absolutely nothing to do with employee retention, I just thought it was interesting.  It’s my blog, sue me…

Anyways…

Get Rid of the Performance Review (part 3)

Ok, I’m still a little flabbergasted by the full page article in last week’s WSJ.  So more of my rant…

The author’s #6 reason for getting rid of the performance review?  …”the performance review is so one-sided, giving the boss all the power.  The boss in the performance review thinks of himself or herself as the evaluator, and doesn’t engage in teamwork with the subordinate.  OUCH.  Another insight into the employment history of the author?

The easiest way around this issue is to change the way the performance review itself, perhaps a 360 degree feedback as an alternative?  For those of you who don’t know, a 360 degree feedback provides performance appraisal data that has been collected from an employee’s peers, supervisors, direct reports, and on occasion external customers. 

If the concern is that the evaluation is too one-sided, the answer isn’t to get rid of the process, the answer is to change “the product”.

Another reason given by the author (and this is a whopper!)  “I believe it’s immoral to maintain the facade that annual pay and perfomance reviews lead to corporate improvement, when it’s clear they lead to more bogus activities than valid ones”  OUCH #2.

“Immoral”? Wow, that is a strong word.  Dictionary.com defines immoral as Not moral; inconsistent with rectitude, purity, or good morals; contrary to conscience or the divine law; wicked; unjust; dishonest; vicious; licentious.  Again, this seems like a push.  Where is the research from the author to back up such a spurious claim?  Part of the performance review process is to determine what training and development activities are needed by the employee in order to improve their performance.  Does the author of the article truly believe that training employees to work better and smarter has no impact on corporate performance and the bottom line?

That’s just plain goofy.

Simple questions for you Managers and Supervisors…  Would you rather know the performance of your employees in the past year, or would you rather be “in the dark”?  Would you rather the performance review be based solely on attendance?  Hey Bob, you did a great job of showing up on time this year… NICE JOB!!   Would you rather just “hope” that customer satisfaction and retention improve by themselves, or would you rather take a pro-active role in helping the company grow and develop?

Now to be fair to the good Doctor, I’ve seen each of the seven issues he raises “in practice”. I’ve seen companies destroy morale by having lousy managers use a lousy process.  Just like with any aspect of their work, supervisors and manager need to be trained, so they can lead.

But don’t throw away the baby with the bathwater.

Voting Day

Don’t forget, Tuesday is “hiring day”… Make your voice heard.  Please.