Delivering the Performance Review - Part 2
January 8th, 2006Today, we conclude our conversation on Delivering the Review. As a brief review, here’s are the items we’ve covered over this show and last:
- The Pre-Meeting E-Mail - You’ll send this about a week in advance of the delivery meeting. In this mail, you begin to set the groundwork for the meeting by telling them what’s going to happen and why.
- In addition, in part 2 we provide a Sample Self-Appraisal Email - Text for an email you can send to all of your ratees to ask for their input SEVERAL weeks in advance of the review.
- Develop The Core Message - This is perhaps the most important, most overlooked, and initially the HARDEST part of your discussion preparation. If you want the ratee to remember ANYTHING, you need to boild down your message to two or three core items. The core message has three parts: Rating, Result, and Ramifications.
- Logistical Preparation - Things you need to do before the meeting around the physical set-up, etc.
- The Day Before - There’s one thing that MUST happen the day before you meet with a ratee. The ONE THING you MUST DO on the day before any review meeting is give the ratee a copy (without pay information) of their review form.
- What To Bring - There is a list of stuff you need to bring with you.
- How To Structure Your Delivery - There is an effective ORDER to your delivery. Our delivery will have three components: behavior, results, and confirmation.
- How To Start - We recommend scripting your opening, with three parts: the agenda, the ground rules, and the core message.
- How To Behave During the Meeting - Some simple tips on being perceived as a good listener and communicator.
Extra Content
| | Legend: 
Members-Only Premium 
Interviewing Series
Members-Only Premium Interviewing Series
Stumble it!Trackback URL for this post: http://www.manager-tools.com/2006/01/delivering-the-performance-review-part-2/trackback/
January 24th, 2006 at 12:24 am
Great podcasts on reviews! I’m just curious why you ask your employee for their self-appraisal before you give them their review. If I was the employee, I would think that the manager was trying to get by without doing much work, especially if the self-appraisal matched the manager’s review pretty closely. I’ve done similar reviews before, but I wanted to make sure that neither party saw each other’s review first. This allowed me to really see where the differences were between our reviews and discuss those during our meeting. I really do like your idea of handing them the review a day before the meeting though - that takes some of the awkwardness out of the meeting.
January 24th, 2006 at 8:11 pm
Eric-
Thanks for the feedback! Glad you like the shows.
And WOW!! It sure says something about management that behavior is filtered through an assumption of possible laziness!
(Upon re-reading MY note below Eric, it sounds a lot more strident than I mean it. I think your question is a GREAT one, and I’m not upset about it. It helps our community understand better why we recommend what we do. That said, I have a hard spot in my heart for managers who do this process poorly, and as I started sharing my answer, I realized how many bad managers I’ve worked with that caused me to come up with the process we recommend.)
The reason we ask for employee ratings is that we want as much data as possible to give the best review.
What may not be clear is that there are TWO types of data in the self evaluation. The first is the obvious: their accomplishments. They’re GOING TO come up with some stuff you didn’t have in your pile of data. MORE IS BETTER HERE.
If they add something that is germane, it is incumbent upon a manager to reconsider the conclusions he has drawn.
Before I go on to the second type of data, let me address two of your comments. First, “especially if the appraisal matched the manager’s review pretty closely”. In my experience, this ONLY HAPPENS when the manager has done a terrible job of gathering data and reviewing records, emails, projects, feedback, one on one forms, etc. When managers start doing this, they are ASTOUNDED at how much data they had been previously missing. And, if a manager isn’t doing that, he’s not doing his job, in my opinion.
What’s more, employees routinely do a TERRIBLE job of capturing their performance. TERRIBLE. The hundreds of self evals I have seen are THIN on actual DATA. In my opinion, they come up with a rating first, and then look for major memories of the year to support that. (Managers do that too, and it’s unprofessional when we do it.)
So, if an employee’s self eval matches the manager’s (not just in ratings but in supporting data, the manger very likely has done a poor job.
And, if the reviews are similar, and the manger has done her homework, she says, “I’m pleased that we see eye to eye on this. Being in agreement about last year makes it easier to agree on next year’s goals.” If an employee draws the conclusion that the manager just used the self eval, the manager probably didn’t share extra data to support her conclusions… or, the employee has a poor attitude and that’s a separate conversation.
The second comment, “neither party saw the others”. Gee - what’s the point in that? The differences are the differences. What does it say about you as a manager if there are a LOT of differences, some of which are based on data that you had forgotten or underestimated? Boy, talk about embarrassing to discover them in front of the employee after already having given them your work!
As I see it, it’s nearly impossible that employee input will LOWER my rating. Even if they do a poor job in preparing, I have to assume there’s a possibility they WON’T add anything, and so I have to feel good about what I have on my own.
Now, they might RAISE the rating if they point out areas where I haven’t done my job. But if that’s the case, why NOT have that in advance, and not have them sit there and STEAM at you that you missed stuff that made a difference?
I’d say to them, “I’m glad you reminded me about A and B and C. It really helped me give you a rating of (blank). Thanks for taking that time.”
Okay, now on to the second type of data: their self ratings. You MUST know this in advance to carefully review (a) whether you’re right based on the data, and (b) to prepare the comments you will use to deliver the message that might be difficult for the employee to hear. This is just professionalism around an important meeting. Remember, you’re obligating your firm for, likely, tens of thousands of dollars in these conversations (don’t forget to tack on 20-30-40% for benefit costs to the org.).
Bottom line: no surprises.
It’s a privilege to serve you. Thanks for listening.
Mark
February 9th, 2006 at 1:52 pm
Mark,
Have been listening to your show for quite a while - great job!
We admit we do a pretty bad job in our annual reviews. We’ve been doing O3’s for the last quarter or two, working on feedback, etc. For years we’ve done reviews on the employees anniversary, but it sounds like you’re recommending (or is more ’standard’) to do annual reviews once a year regardless of hire date. Is that best? If so how do you handle employees hired only months prior to your annual reviews?
Lastly you talk quite a bit about review forms and how the vary from company to company. Well, we really don’t have one. The review form we do have now is provided by our HR/Payroll partner (ADP TotalSource). We haven’t used them very much so I’m not sure if there is a ‘better’ way or form we should use. If you’re interested in seeing it I would be glad to forward it to you by email.
Thank you for your help, your great show, and sharing your wisdom!
February 9th, 2006 at 10:35 pm
Jason-
Thanks for the kudos!
You’re not the first asking about timing. and I’m sorry this wasn’t clear. Whatever you do, DO NOT change to everyone getting reviewed at the same time. I know major companies that are PARALYZED in January by managers’ time being swallowed whole by doing 20 reviews, and a total lack of energy from everyone waiting to see how they did. STAY the way you are.
Here’s the RIGHT way to do reviews. Each person gets a review under one of three circumstances. Either it’s been a year since their previous review by the same boss, or they change bosses, or they change jobs. In the last two instances, a boss cannot evaluate someone with less than 90 days of supervision… so sometimes people end up with un-rated time… but it works out fine.
Mike and I do have a review form we recommend, but there are several reasons why we cant share it. Really, any form is tolerable, as long as it is used professionally. I would love to see your form.
It’s a privilege to do this for you,
Mark
February 14th, 2006 at 11:49 pm
I found you a little late to do the performance review the way you suggested–this year. We have a very formal review template: objectives and results, place for ee and manager (”N+1″) and N+2 comments, then a section on strengths and development areas with a requirement that every development area has to have an associated development plan. Therefore, the ee does the self-assessment of objectives and results as part of the process.
I did a performance review today with an ee needing adjusting feedback in the review. I also did it with my manager in the room (I’m a relatively new manager). I gave out the review to the ee 3 days before the review and sent an edited version of your pre-meeting email suggesting topics that they should consider before the review. The structure that my manager suggested was that the ee lead the discussion of their year, what they thought were their significant accomplishments and high points, then go over the low points. I had a script of things that I considered the core message (eg, this year cannot be a repeat of last year), but found I did not have to say many of these things myself, that the ee broached many of the topics themself, and we could naturally discuss them without making it seem like a pile-on. In the end it was very constructive (less negative than I had anticipated), and I think (will need to verify and monitor) they got the message about improved performance.
So that was a long-winded way of saying, I didn’t try to use your agenda leading the whole discussion (agenda, ground rules, explicit core message, discuss areas of agreement, then areas of disagreement, etc.). The reviewee could expose their level of self-awareness and we could naturally dive into areas of the core message script in a relatively natural way.
Have you ever done it this way? Any drawbacks to this that you see?
Thanks, David.
May 19th, 2006 at 8:34 am
Hi Mark,
I discovered this website only a couple of weeks ago, and since then I have been voraciously listening to many of the podcasts! The absolutely practical and implementable nature of your podcasts is really what makes them stand out. Great to learn from you.
I had a question on the “core message” step in the performance review process. Is the core message, part of the written appraisal form which you hand over to the ratee the previous day of the appraisal? Pardon me, if I am asking what you already stated in the podcast.
Regards, Jacob
May 20th, 2006 at 5:31 pm
Jacob-
Thanks for your kind words. We love it when our members are voracious about our stuff.
Yes, the core message is part of the written appraisal. You don’t have to call it a core message, but it ought to be written in a way that the core message is supported and reinforced.
Good question - sorry we we weren’t more clear.
It’s a privilege to serve you.
Mark
January 10th, 2007 at 4:13 pm
Found your podcasts halfway through the year… Now that it’s review time, I’m able to access the writing/delivering a review podcasts from 2005/2006. They’re extremely helpful. The service you guys offer is of high value. As a first year manager, I am very appreciative of the wisdom shared. Thanks so much!
January 12th, 2007 at 9:37 pm
Jim-
Our pleasure. Thanks for the kind words, and glad you’re getting value from our work.
It’s a privilege to serve you this way.
Mark
October 15th, 2007 at 10:33 pm
Mark & Mike,
Thank you for helping me to not only deliver an effective review to my team members but for giving me a sense of personal accomplishment for a job well done.
Though I have been in a management role for 20 years, I realize that I have never learned the art of management. I’ve been a hack.
After the first review with the most senior member of my staff, he went directly to the HR Director and told her that his review was the most professional of his career; it had the most direct and relevant feedback; and he had told the other members of the team that they were going to love the format. I know this because she announced it to the entire management team in front of my boss at the weekly staff meeting! It was gratifying to receive such immediate positive feedback and I owe it all to you.
I look forward to next year when after a year of coaching and One on Ones, we have an even more effective performance review process. Next week we role out the new and improved staff meeting!
Thank you for bringing satisfaction back to my job.
Warm Regards from your student,
Allen
October 21st, 2007 at 1:53 am
Allen,
Thanks for sharing that story … made my week! THIS is what we do the podcasts for … Thank you!
best regards,
Mike
October 30th, 2007 at 2:44 pm
Mark and Mike,
We have a situation where we are required to deliver the reviews before compensation comes back from corporate. Is there a best way to handle this situation?
Best regards,
Ari