The idea which employees prefer to performance appraisals

by L&D11 May 2016
Employers overwhelming say regular performance appraisals are important to engage their workforce.

Interestingly, a similar amount of employees instead want to provide their own feedback to employers, according to new research by Hays.

The ‘Staff Engagement: Ideas for action’ report is based on a survey of 1,196 employers and employees.
 
It found that 77% of employers said regular performance appraisals are ‘very important’ or ‘important’ in engaging their workforce.
 
However, 76% of employees instead want the opportunity to provide feedback on cultural and performance factors, which could involve reverse appraisals or employee surveys.
 
If they were not given this opportunity, 17% would look for another job and a further 46% may consider looking elsewhere.

Moreover, 92% of employees rated ‘seeing action taken as a result of their feedback’ as ‘very important’ or ‘important’.

“Performance management is important in employee engagement terms because people need to know how they’re performing, where they’re going and how they can improve,” said Nick Deligiannis, Managing Director of Hays in Australia & New Zealand.

“But this should involve more than one annual performance review. With many organisations reviewing the value of a once a year review, they are instead considering a more regular ongoing feedback system in which employees receive timely feedback on an ongoing basis.

“Crucially, performance management needs to become a two-way process. Employees want to voice their opinions on their progress as well as hear their manager’s.”

Reverse appraisals can also be used to make the voice of employees louder, added Deligiannis.

“Employees should be given the opportunity to evaluate their managers and the organisation,” he said.

“‘Upward’ feedback can identify areas for improvement that will help employees be more productive and give them the tools to do their job better.

“They can be very insightful provided an organisation is prepared to take the feedback on board and make change accordingly. After all, nobody is perfect. Even the best manager or organisation can improve.”

Moreover, there has been a lot of publicity over the last few years about the death of the performance appraisal, or the move to the ratingless performance appraisal, said Tym Lawerence, Director, Solutions Architect at SumTotal, a Skillsoft company.
 
“But really what we are seeing is not so much the death of those but the rise of continuous feedback,” he told L&D Professional.
 
This means that any time you can give feedback to one of your peers or request feedback for things you have done or your team have done, Lawrence added.
 
“It’s important to have that information done in real time at the end of any project or at the end of any quarter or month, and to make that information available when I might be doing my more formal mid-year/end of year reviews,” he said.
 
“So we are seeing continuous feedback supporting - not necessarily replacing - the traditional performance review.”

Related stories:

5 ways to implement effective performance reviews 

Four ways to deal with learners resistant to feedback

3 ways L&D professionals can make mistakes giving feedback 

COMMENTS

  • by 11/05/2016 3:08:56 PM

    Nothing New Under the Sun Department: this approach was promulgated by consultants Cullen Egan Dell in the 1980s... and it worked. Why did we stop using it?

    HW

  • by JA 11/05/2016 3:55:49 PM

    I agree with HW - definitely nothing new here.

    Continuous feedback has been and should always be the approach with regard to a PMS. The block generally arises as Manager's don't want to provide feedback yet are prepared to whinge to anyone who will listen to them about the poor performance of an employee. They prefer to focus on the task and not the person undertaking the task.

    This is just breaking down the process to make it easily digestible for them.