It’s your job to make sure that those who you oversee are doing good work. You have to make sure that resources are being invested wisely. And you would also like to get feedback on how you are doing as a leader. Performance evaluations are the way forward, right? Get ready to be disappointed. For the most part, Performance Evaluations are a broken management process. Really? Yep.
Many leaders allow issues with a team member or direct report to build over 3 months, 6 months, or in some cases even a year. Then BAM! You smack a person in the face with their performance evaluation! But this is seldom a productive process for feedback. Who even remembers what they did months ago? Delaying positive or negative feedback makes it almost useless. Along with this, many leaders have no process for regular dialogue concerning how well they are leading.
Ken Blanchard in his book, the One Minute Manager, argues for what he calls One Minute Praise and One Minute Reprimands. When someone does something well, let them know right away. Consistently notice and recognize a job well done. When someone fails at something, tell the person what they did wrong quickly. Make sure to focus on the behavior of the person and not on the person himself.
Blanchard suggests this process: (With my edits)
A commitment to regular, ongoing dialogue takes work but is well worth the investment.
Performance evaluations can be a helpful tool when they are not an isolated event but are instead built on the foundation of real-time feedback.
There is little more miserable than being told how badly you are doing at something by someone anonymous. Performance evaluations, especially those offered by a lot of different people, often separate feedback from community. The person who receives the performance evaluation has no real way to ask questions or dialogue about areas of improvement. There is no process of knowing if the feedback is fair or who has given it. This ambiguity creates tension and undermines trust.
Instead of relying on anonymous performance evaluations, look to create an organizational culture where ongoing, honest dialogue occurs. The best kind of feedback is given in an environment of trust, where team members care about one another. In the book 5 Dysfunctions of a Team, Patrick Lencioni writes about two major issues that will undermine the health of any organization or team: lack of trust and lack of healthy conflict. Anonymous, ambiguous, general performance evaluations are unhelpful. A culture of trust, healthy conflict, communication, and honesty is far more valuable.
BTW, this all starts with you, the leader. Are you approachable? Correctable? Vulnerable? Honest? Willing to admit mistakes? Healthy organizations are led by leaders who commit to these disciplines.
Performance evaluations can be a helpful tool when they are built on a foundation of an ongoing dialogue where there are trust and teachability.
To rely primarily on performance evaluations is to procrastinate conflict, correction and praise, and divorce feedback from community. Consider instead building an atmosphere of trust, where open dialogue can take place, and where healthy conflict occurs.