Performance evaluation: Fathoming the five fallacies

Performance is all about delivering results and fulfilling expectations. A performance management system of an organisation should answer what, why and how aspects of organisational performance. My focus today is on employee performance, particularly, on how it is evaluated.

Form filling

Employee Performance Evaluation (EPE) can be a treasure or a torture based on a variety of contributing factors. They can be institutional and individual. Let me propose five fallacies of EPE that would address the key issues.

Rather sadly, EPE has become a form filling ritual in some organisations. I have personally seen how some senior administrators giving blank sheets to their subordinates to sign saying that "this will help you to get your increment". The vital link between EPE and organisational performance is alarmingly lacking.

What should happen is proper fact finding. The appraiser should have a clear understanding about the employee's actual performance, based on factual evidence. It cannot be done overnight unless a manager carefully observes and take notes throughout the year.

Fast judgment

Everyone is pressed for time. Managers resort to rush through a large pile of appraisals and inevitably giving a fast judgment. Why it is not OK in most of the cases is that, an over-reliance on your memory, without considering the strengths and shortcomings of the person in detail.

It may be argued as a case for efficiency, but effectiveness in achieving the expected results is far more important.

Therefore, the only way to overcome this fallacy is to have a fare assessment. That demands the investment of your time. Do justice to someone's future by accurately assessing past performance.

Fun praise

There is a temptation among managers to be popular. They resist giving bad news or negative feedback to their subordinates. I recall a Production Manager telling a HR professional that he will sign and deliver the increment letter, but the warning letters or disciplinary letters should be signed by HR.

The danger of this approach is that a manager might divert to the extreme of giving 'fun praise'. According to Jack Welsh, the biggest injustice against an employee is the deprivation of his or her right to know exactly how he or she is performing.

We have the typical Asian culture emerging here. Rather than telling upfront, if someone is under-performing, we tend to say, "not bad", "you are OK", "do not worry".

The employee is getting a false signal that he or she is doing well, which might not be the reality. One sure cure to move away from this fallacy is to have focal points for performance discussion. Your feedback to the team member should be focused on specific behavioural aspects, backed by real examples.

False opinion

In management, we have a high regard for MBO approach which means "management by objectives". Unfortunately, we have another MBO in Sri Lanka. That is 'management by opinions'. We tend to jump to conclusions based on what someone has told us about a particular person, without proper fact finding.

One reason for such a tendency could be the lack of time for a superior to observe his or her team members and assess how they are going about in achieving their objectives. Instead, trusting the 'grape wine' too much, or relying on other's input on a person will often lead to false opinion.

Why this is damaging, is that the person is not getting an opportunity to share his or her side of the story. In overcoming this fallacy, the only way possible is regular observation. Maintaining a log book where you note down the pluses and minuses with respect to the behaviour of your team mates. It can be in soft copy involving any good program or a traditional note book.

Futile accusation

This is another common issue with managers lacking empathy. Reaching one sided judgments without looking at both sides of an issue. Take a behavioural issue such as indiscipline for example. The supervisor can make a firm accusation that the particular team member is not following his instructions.

Instead, having a frank discussion and giving specific feedback will heal the wounds. A frank discussion will pave the way to a genuine two-way process in ironing out differences between a team leader and a team member.

It should be an integral part of the EPE. Fallacy of futile accusation can be nullified only by engaging in such a process. Rather than cluttering your mind with negative perceptions of an employee, going with an open mind and verifying the doubts through discussion is the tested and proved method for performance enhancement.

Forward path

The five fallacies of EPE are interrelated and may influence a person to take an incorrect decision regarding another person. That's where institutional mechanisms can add value. Developing EPE through training is one such example. The time has come for us to ensure a transparent and effective EPE process, which in turn will pave the way for progress.

The writer is the Acting Director of the Postgraduate Institute of Management. He also serves as an Adjunct Professor in the Division of Management and Entrepreneurship, Price College of Business, University of Oklahoma, USA.