Performance evaluations should focus on employee job performance, but they are only part of the overall process.
Here’s an example to help illustrate my point:
I once worked with a medical device-testing firm that was experiencing fairly high turnover, in the neighborhood of 25%. The solution for this company, which valued highly performing scientific employees, needed to come from a comprehensive performance management strategy.
Part of the turnover problem had to do with people not fitting in the jobs they were doing. As a result, we focused initially on defining jobs. This also benefited the recruitment process by improving the quality of the candidates and creating a better initial fit.
In terms of current employees, I met with supervisors on a one-on-one basis regarding not only the positions they managed, but also preparing them to match their overall operation objectives with the performance they expected from each employee.
It was important for the company to show that performance management was a priority, so we agreed to begin our performance evaluation process well in advance of the actual evaluation meetings.
I helped them determine:
- What the timeframe would be; for this company, the process started in July with a deadline of completion and communication by calendar year end.
- How the timeframe would be communicated to managers; a combination of group meetings and individual communications were implemented.
- Schedules for coaching and training managers on the process.
- How the process would be managed in terms of follow-up by management and HR.
The result of these activities, which stretched over a year-and-a-half period of time for this company, were that turnover figures were reduced from 25 percent to 17 percent.
Part of that reduction was due to improvements in hiring that came out of defining the job, but the majority had to do with the company having better formal communication with employees about their performance. This helped prevent situations where employees were unclear or uncertain about their job responsibilities, so they left the company as a result or performed badly based on mismatched expectations.
I think it was a useful experience for the management team, too, because they got a lot of feedback directly from employees, which helped them in the overall operation of the business.
I recommended that the company give employees the opportunity to rate their own performance, just to get the employee’s view. So during the preparation process, employees were given that opportunity. This resulted in more frequent and better quality communication, even informally.
This gives employees the chance to work with their manager more, and to have a discussion regarding the objectives of their position and what they need to do to be successful. This communication can be a powerful motivator.
It’s much easier to conduct the performance evaluation process when employees know what to expect. And if they’re having constant dialogue with their manager, they will.