Just Deserts

The semi-annual evaluation process was complete last Tuesday and other than having that task checked off your projects list, you wonder if the process is more of a distraction rather than a real benefit. The recent changes were supposed to improve understanding and acceptance. But everyone still dreads the evaluations and the outcome seems demotivating.

The first question every leader should ask about the evaluation process is "are we about reflecting on past behavior or improving future accomplishments?" Most will want to answer "both". But that very answer may lead to an ill focused process. As the Chinese proverb states, "a fox that chases two rabbits, seldom catches one." Unfortunately most organizations and businesses have viewed the evaluation process as a measure of past work and behaviors. In essence such a process is applying the principle of “just deserts”. "Just deserts" is not about influencing future actions but singularly about reward or punishment for occurrences in the past. Unfortunately this approach has held sway in the world of work such that future promotions and awards are almost always dominated by past behavior. This logical concept in many cases becomes bane of improving performance. But in the absence of an acceptable alternative, most continue the same backward looking process. Once a leader decides that the evaluation process should be focused on performance that is often months past, he or she is less equipped to address behavioral improvements. This leader finds him or herself focusing on performance negatives that leads to demotivation and even programing the very actions that are causing problems. Telling someone what they have done wrong does not in and of itself lead them to doing it right in the future. It is a little like asking someone, not to spill the coffee again. Put another way, punishing someone for tardiness has far less positive impact than rewarding for timeliness.

Little wonder most everyone approaches the annual evaluation event with the same enthusiasm one would associate with a visit to a proctologist. Regardless of your control or lack of control in your evaluation process, it is possible to improve its ability to positively influence future employee behavior if it includes the following ingredients.

Shared Performance View

"Shared performance view" is the coming to agreement between the evaluator and the evaluated as to what is good about the performance in question and what can be done to improve it. Please notice the absence of negative expressions. This approach operates on the principle that future improved performance is built upon past good performance. That is not to say that glaring deficiencies should not be addressed. Rather the way we address those deficiencies should be better formed.

Improvement Modeling

Seldom does a leader find an employee who is bad at everything they are asked to do. If such is the case someone needs to examine the employee selection process. Psychologists have long recognized the concept of competency transfer. This is why good tennis players can quickly pick up baseball even though they may have never played the game. When an employee is good at one skill you can often, by having them recall that skill in a new context, transfer or see them adopt that competency in an unrelated skill set. We are not sure how the mind does this magic trick. We just know it does. Improvement modeling takes some work but the benefits are almost always worth the effort.

Desired Outcome Agreement

Once agreement of past performance is established, a good leader should quickly change the focus to future actions and goals. Where measurable results are available, all parties should be in agreement to reaching new and better results. In the event that performance does not render itself to easily measured results, the evaluated as well the evaluator should describe what good performance looks like and quantify that vision as much as possible.

Benefits Support Performance

Because performance review is closely associated with an agreement or a new compact between the evaluated and the evaluator, the evaluator must bring new consideration to the table if improved results are to be expected. Many falsely believe that monetary rewards are sufficient. Unfortunately research has found that assumption to be flawed. To change both motivation and subsequently performance, the consideration of other, more psychic income based, items need to be included within your arsenal of benefits. Greater recognition, autonomy, work flexibility and opportunity to learn have been found to further the motivation curve. But these must be designed with input from the evaluated to have the best potential for success.

In essence the evaluation process should be for the benefit of the evaluated; and through that benefit the betterment of the entire organization.

Tom Dugard is an Affirmational leadership specialist and the owner of Affirmational Leadership Consulting. For more information, please visit the Affirmational Leadership Consulting website. (http://affirmational.com/)