Performance Evaluation Input

For supervisory staff especially, it is helpful to get constructive feedback from other supervisors (peers), the person’s supervisees, and maybe even external contacts with which this supervisor has regular contact. Many companies try this only to abandon the activity when the feedback is less than helpful. I’ve tried various techniques to maximize the positives of peer and supervisee feedback and minimize the mean and unproductive things folks say when providing feedback. Here’s a brief discussion.

Why use feedback to inform performance evaluations?

Looking at a front line supervisor position, feedback might be helpful in the following scenarios:

If a company has strong peer-to-peer relationship values, this feedback is essential to know how employees are using this value.
Supervisors with an authoritative style may be stifling supervisee ideas – how else would you know?
Some supervisors cater to supervisees and are isolated from or less kind to their peers.
Perhaps most of the supervisor’s contacts are outside the company and external relations are highly valued.
Feedback from more than one dimension can provide the best, well-rounded context for the supervisor’s performance development.

Pitfalls

You create these questionnaires, you explain why you’re gathering feedback and you let participants know that recurring themes will be discussed with the employee for their evaluation. Sounds straightforward. Two ways for this to go wrong – one is participants are afraid to provide feedback if they question or distrust your assurances. This is a difficult problem to overcome. It takes a trusting, professional atmosphere. You can begin with a pilot program and expand as employees see that the original documents are not seen by the employee. Creating a healthy workplace culture is the topic of several individual posts on this blog.

The other is that participants go overboard detailing everything the employee ever did wrong. Employees may not be experienced in providing feedback. Sometimes they mistake this as an invitation to vent. Understanding professional boundaries is something employees often need support to achieve. Starting with the assumption that most employees have some useful feedback, the key is to ask only questions for which answers are helpful.

Try this

The key is to tie the question to the employee’s effect on those around them and avoid open-ended questions. You want to focus on what the employee does and not workers’ personal opinions about them.

“Please note areas in which you feel this individual performs well or where his or her actions contribute to your success or the success of the organization.”
“Please note areas in which you think this individual could make some changes in order to better contribute to your success or the organization’s success:

Introduction

There are many reasons why employees can’t or won’t perform up to supervisory expectations or even up to their own potential. Often there are clues that suggest the ultimate source of poor performance but anecdotal evidence of today’s performance shortfall not sufficient to diagnose the underlying issue. A comprehensive look at the environment in which the employee works is in order.

Because the objective of initial performance counselings must be improvement, it’s important to assess the person, the supervisor and context in which the work takes place. If it is determined that real improvements are possible, this will help in crafting the performance improvement plan.

In those cases when termination is the end result of attempted performance improvement, knowing the causes can help you can tailor the discussions to create the smoothest, most professional and compassionate separation process. It will also support an affirmative defense if needed.

If the person is in the wrong position, demanding higher performance can unnecessarily frustrate and stress the employee. It would also be useless if there is something amiss with the supervisor or work atmosphere. It is best to conduct a comprehensive look at the overall picture. This article explores the four different dimensions that might combine to cause an employee’s poor performance.

FOUR DIMENSIONS OF EMPLOYEE POOR PERFORMANCE

1. It’s the employee
2. It’s the supervisor/poor employee preparation
3. It’s the job
4. It’s the workplace atmosphere
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

1. It’s the employee

There are several potential issues with an origin in the person themselves. Some may be technical and some may be relational (can’t get along with others). Of course if the person lacks technical skills there could also be issues with recruitment. In this case attention can turn to whether there is time and capacity for the person to learn the required skills. Depending upon the company investment to this point and the employee’s capacity to learn the new skills, additional training may work. Below is a listing of potential internal issues which would contribute to poor performance. The employee may:

Lack requisite technical skills (recruitment process?)
Lack requisite people relations skills (recruitment process?)
Lack work ethic (references checked?)
May be an acceptable performer but is unhappy and wants a different position (self-sabotage)
Have an undisclosed learning disability or medical condition affecting performance
Have problems with authority: rejects idea that someone will judge their work
Have mental health challenges: depression, personality disorder, PTSD, etc.

2. It’s the supervisor or poor employee preparation

Sometimes the person has the capacity to perform at a higher level but has not been given the initial tools and direction to create an opportunity for success. The result can be unspoken or disparate assumptions about what is considered good performance by the supervisor. Perhaps the supervisor has failed to meet regularly with the employee. Employees need the opportunity to ask questions privately and to admit they might need more information. Perhaps the supervisor is a poor communicator. Below is a listing of potential issues which may originate with how the employee is readied for the position or managed once in the job:

Employee does not understand the relative priorities of various tasks
Employee does not know company policies or procedures
Employee does not understand what supervisor likes, wants or dislikes

3. It’s the job

Sometimes the person is capable and knows what to do but the volume is just too high for one person to handle. Another issue is whether the employee has the information and tools to complete their work in an optimum fashion. Sometimes poor job design can be the culprit. There are natural groupings of tasks or assignments that allow a person with certain strengths to be successful. When unrelated or markedly different tasks are thrown together, it may be difficult to find the unique individual who is good at all of them. An example would be a position that requires high-level people relational skills AND high-level scientific skills. You can see the point. Below is a listing of potential job design issues that might contribute to poor performance.

Job volume is based on extremely high performer and person is new
Job contains too many unrelated accountabilities
Quality standards are impossible to meet
Long vacancies mean heavy workloads for those filling in (recruitment and job design)
The job qualifications used in recruitment don’t actually match what is required for the position

4. It’s the workplace atmosphere

Most of us have experienced a toxic workplace environment in which good employees are so distracted by stress and drama that they cannot properly attend to job performance. Studies show that toxic coworkers, bosses and an otherwise negative work culture are associated with productivity decreases. It’s not enough to have the right people and the right goals; someone has to ensure that the workplace is conducive to employees reaching their potential. Here are potential environmental issues that might be a source of sub-par performance.

The workplace atmosphere is overly negative: toxic employees and power struggles
A powerful informal leader calling the shots
Good people aren’t consistently praised/rewarded and so become disinterested
Negative conduct is not redirected so that coworkers are stressed by coworker abusive behavior

Summary

Performance issues can be a result of one of the four dimensions noted here but it can also be a result of a complex combination of more than one dimension. When there are several poor performers or a trusted and valued performer’s success begins to slide, it may be helpful to look at the supervisory team or the department as a whole. Often, companies are well-served to bring in an external consultant to bring an objective, seasoned diagnosis of all the barriers to departmental success. In any event, if you pay attention to potential causes the chance of a successful performance intervention is greatly increased.

Benoit Consulting

Strategies to promote a positive workplace culture

Tag Archives: Supervisor

How to Make 360 Performance Feedback Less Snarky, More Helpful

Performance Evaluation Input

Why use feedback to inform performance evaluations?

Pitfalls

Try this

Four Potential Causes of Employee Poor Performance

Follow “Benoit Consulting”