(From The Huffington Post) -- For better or worse, performance evaluations are a reality in business. But just because they are necessary, it doesn't mean they are being done in a way that produces productive and constructive results. In fact, at their worst, they can cause employees to recoil, spreading insecurity, self-consciousness and fear.
No matter what type of organization, performance evaluation goals should be fairly consistent across the board. Mainly, they should be used to communicate how well an employee's performance meets the needs and demands of his or her role within the organization. So, yes, it is a performance management tool, but it is also a vital communication vehicle. If companies would see it as such, the process itself would improve markedly and net much better results.
At its core, employees need to walk away from their evaluation understanding what effect their past behavior has had on the business and also, what they can do going forward to ensure they continue contributing to their own growth as well as to that of the company's.
Perhaps the most far reaching cause for problems during any type of performance management in general, and evaluation specifically, is the inherent discomfort and resistance that managers experience in having to deliver what they perceive as "bad news." So, before further analysis can be devoted to what makes a review succeed or fail, one must first be clear about what organizational results this evaluative process needs to produce.
- An employee should deliver a net gain to the organization's bottom line and/or overall growth.
- A performance review should help employees understand the context of his/her role within the broader organization and its intended effect on the mission.
- Performance feedback should motivate employees to advance forward in the same direction the organization is headed.
- Evaluations should help employees manage accurate perceptions of themselves.