Traditional performance reviews, promoted by big-brand performance management systems, hurt people and the companies for whom they work. These artifacts of a bygone era place a premium on process, scores and conformity to subjective behavioral standards. Meanwhile, they discount the significance of people, goals and feedback.
In the end, these systems are bad for both companies and workers. In the hands of an inexperienced or over-tasked manager, a single rushed or haphazard performance review can permanently change the trajectory of an individual’s career and economic opportunity. Implemented in companies that must navigate change at a rapid velocity, these systems are obstacles to agility and alignment, often resulting in positive performance appraisals but poor business outcomes.
And with no evidence that these performance management practices actually improve individual goal attainment or overall business performance, they may only be viewed as biased, vacuous and ineffective.
A recent study by Deloitte found that only 8% of companies believe their performance management drives business value. More so, 58% report it is not an effective use of time.
The annual performance review has become something employees and managers hate. Your typical performance review is an inaccurate representation of how your employees are performing. The Internet has tons of people complaining about the dreaded annual review. Google “Why does performance management suck” and you’ll find an endless amount of data supporting the suckiness of performance management.
Find more at www.MightyYou.com.
Stay tuned for Performance Management is harmful, but it doesn’t have to be this way.