Performance appraisals, waste of bloody time???

rant begins ...

I am assuming that there are bosses, managers and employees on this site that have been involved with the performance appraisal process and would value your opinions.
I have just been through this process myself and have always despised this method of getting colleagues to do the ‘evaluating’. I am wondering if this is common amongst other companies.

A clear example is of a colleague in a previous company who was criticized by a co- worker in her appraisal forms. Not only was she allowed to read it but was also told who had wrote it. She burst into tears, stormed out of the meeting and publicly confronted the author with accusations and frustrated anger. They had previously been friends, and she never spoke to him again. I felt for her at the time as the whole affair was poorly managed and I vowed never to get into a similar situation.
To criticize anyone behind their back, on paper, knowing this paper is viewed all the way to the top MD is un-constructive, degrading and just plain shabby.

I am certainly NOT above criticism but it made me furious that my Manager asked two people in the office whom I work with to write down (this is a permanent record mind you) their evaluation of my performance. In fact when my Manager questioned me as to my anger at the completed appraisal he said “why are you upset, you don’t rate their opinion do you, I don’t?” :o

I too was asked to fill in the forms for two colleagues during this same appraisal process. One of them was my direct Manager and decided that 1/ my manager’s boss the MD was not competent enough to deal with the critique in a positive manner 2/ as the person I was meant to appraise was my own manager and I knew he would be allowed to read the form, it was not prudent to be honest 3/ filled in appraisal forms are not the correct venue for ANY criticism by sub-ordinates and 4/ if I had any serious issues then they should have been dealt with immediately and in another way.

What I did do was fill in was my positive view of my Managers performance. I was not glowing with praise and did not point out weaknesses. Whatever weaknesses he does have I can live with or I will bring them up with him in a timely manner NOT on paper and NOT in the view of his own manager, the MD.

I am his sub-ordinate NOT his performance trainer. It should not be my responsibility to try and change his behavior.

Unless an appraisal process is run by competent TRAINED managers I think it can be extremely damaging to all concerned.

Rant over!! :roll: But do let me know if you’ve had similar experiences.

These things can and often are absolute rubbish. Setting aside the point that only looking at performance once a year is poor management, as you say, the subordinate is not his boss's performance manager.
If there is going to be an annual performance review, it should be a review of the subordinate by the manager. It should be just the two of them, with the manager raising any issues (good or bad) and the subordinate having the opportunity to answer them. The subordinate should be able to raise with the manager any issues (but this may be dangerous depending on the manager). The manager's report should be shown to the subordinate (if he can't cope with that he shouldn't be a manager) and the subordinate should have the opportunity to comment.
Another way that can work well for some employees, but possibly not for those who are shy or modest, is for the subordinate to do their own assessment and go through it with their own manager.

The appraisal responses should ALWAYS to Anonymous to the appraised, otherwise there is the possibility of recriminations, and you don't get a fair response (As you have shown).

but then again, I have never seen an effective performance appraisal system. they are always open to abuse (and are abused) and used in the wrong way.

Thank god I don't have to go through these any more. The last time I had one of them was about 1997.

I agree the 360 feedback system is not very effective. People either use it as a chance to have a whinge about a colleague, or they're afraid of being honest in case of repercussions, so it's pretty pointless doing it at all. It's supposed to benefit the person being reviewed but at the end of the day, the only rating that really matters is the one that determines your pay scale and/or whether you keep your job.

Another wonderful idea from the land of the septic tank.

I'm in agreement with Alex, having been through this in my previous employment.

The appraisal process is between you and the manager you report to. It is not a collegue to collegue appraisal. Any comments your manager adds and even his manager should be shown to you.

In the appraisal process I used to go through, the person being appraised had the last say.

This way you get a chance to 'correct' any inaccuracies or misconceptions your manager and/or his manger may have about you.

Remember this appraisal is about you and noone else.

If there is 'tension' between people at work this is usually mediated by 'trained' people. In large companies this is usually the Human Resources department but can also be external firms. It usually involves the people concerned and their managers. (been through this and it's not a nice path to go down, but that's another story)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gra

The appraisal responses should ALWAYS to Anonymous to the appraised, otherwise there is the possibility of recriminations, and you don't get a fair response (As you have shown).

but then again, I have never seen an effective performance appraisal system. they are always open to abuse (and are abused) and used in the wrong way.

---

True. When I was a manager I dealt with issues as they happened. I reserved the yearly appraisal for a "how was your year" and "what shall we do to improve things generally"

It does nothing, unless pointed everyone else above me, that it should only be used in the way originally intended by way of those above you doing the appraisal not sideways, except cause conflict and further enflame office politics.

Office politics - I am so glad to have nothing to ever do with again, office appraisals the same :~ - which should be taken to with a :minigun: and other violent means. :2tsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kaiser Soze

True. When I was a manager I dealt with issues as they happened. I reserved the yearly appraisal for a "how was your year" and "what shall we do to improve things generally"

---

Ditto - much easier and more relevant to deal with an issue on the spot particularly in a small business..

Actually I believe that 360 appraisal methods are better than the traditional manager/worker appraisal method, but they must be conducted properly and of course all feedback should be anonymous. I have worked for great managers and very poor managers, and every level in between. With the great managers whatever comes up in the appraisal is never a surprise, and is always just a reflection of what you are already aware of with your performance, because you get regular feedback anyway. With the poor managers they base their judgement on personal opinion, they constantly surprise you at appraisal time and are amazing in the level of stupidity that they are willing to expose in themselves. Which is why I've found it difficult to cope with 1 on 1 appraisals when I've been working for poor managers.

I've also been a manager, and I don't believe I've ever sprung a surprise on anyone at appraisal time. Then again, I've also sacked people for incompetence before they ever got to appraisal time!

The best appraisal I ever had was when my first contract was up for renewal. I knew I'd been doing a great job, and I knew that my boss was a great boss. So I wasn't worried in the slightest. He sat me down, said "Well, I'm very happy. How about you?" I said "Yep, loving it. Wouldn't mind more money though." So he offered me a fairly hefty payrise and that was it. Appraisal done! Wish they were all that easy...

True Poppa
Sadly good Managers are very rare, yet I always think good managing is easy. 90% is being a good listener, 5% is replying and 5% is appropriate action (and 1% is bad math). Bad managers make me furious because the right path is so much easier.

My worst manager used to read out all her personal emails to everyone in the office at the top of her voice, would have stand up shouting arguments with other staff and consistently arrive 5 to 15 minutes late every day. Her tantrums were epic and we staff were embarrassed for her.

One thing I have noticed though, the worse the manager is the tighter and more close knit the staff are. This must be the Machiavellian approach to leadership?

The company will remain nameless...

The process was software configuration at the headquarters location. The configuration was then downloaded to the equipment at the customer's site

Field personnel had serious accuracy problems with this process and we would spell out the configuration using the actual statements that would be used by the configuration process.
</O:p
The customer had 16 different sites and the ONLY difference between each site was the address of the device. <O:p

I typed up the configuration file with the note to make sixteen files, one for each of the list of addresses.<O:p

The address was correct in each of the sixteen files. The resulting configurations were wrong and each file had a different set of incorrect parameters.

Fast forward about 6 months. It is review time and unfortunately I happened to be in company headquarters that day. I'm walking down the hall and the employee's manager calls out, "Hey Rich! Come in here for a minute." <O:p

Stupid me, I follow instructions. The manager explains that he is giving the employee an unsatisfactory review (YES, the manager actually said unsatisfactory review. One step lower and the employee would be sacked.) and wants me to explain the problems that I had with configurations. Until that time I had never met the employee face to face. The problems that I was having with the customer’s configurations were noted by my manager in one of his weekly reports

That, my friends, is a sterling example of (fill in the blank) <FILL blank the in><FILL blank the in>management.

But then again, it is the same company that tried to implement the management theory professed by Jack Welsh. (Reward the top 15%, sack the bottom 15% and put the remaining 70% "On Notice".) It almost destroyed the company. Stock went from a high in the high 60s to about 4. <O:p

I've worked for that nameless company...

I too was ranked in performance against colleagues on the other side of the world, by managers I had never reported to or worked with.
Luckily I never ended up in the bottom 15% bin.

I always found it incredible that HR had to roll out some new appraisal method every few years, none of which were effective.

Kept HR busy though.