Dan Oswald’s recent epinion, “Bell Curve, or Everyone’s Excellent?” garnered a wide variety of interesting responses from our readers. One reader found that performance appraisals are a “revenge tool,” while others agreed that managers have to be tougher in grading performance.
Oswald, who is CEO of BLR, blogs on business and leadership in the The Oswald Letter. View his original post here.
Here are representative comments:
I have this same problem every year. Some managers will rate all their direct reports as "exceeds expectations," because they think that “meeting expectations” has a bad connotation (like a "C"). I like the article, but can anyone give me any real advice on how to get managers and employees to understand what the ratings really mean, other than just pointing them to this article?
Reviews a Revenge Tool
I would love to improve, not be beat down. It’s unfortunate that my company uses performance reviews like some kind of revenge tool and then [doesn’t] tell you what they expect or how to improve, just because your supervisor is angry or doesn’t like you.
Real Management Headache
"Not everyone is equal despite what they tell kids in youth sports in which everyone gets a trophy." So true—and this mentality that has been fostered in kids is turning into a real management headache when the "kids" get into the workplace with a sense of entitlement and inflated egos.
Great Post
Like everything else, effective performance appraisals that actually motivate and inspire employees require a commitment to communication and a dedication to the on-going development of those employees who have the desire and initiative to reach those upper levels. Great post—thank you!
HR budget cuts? Let us help. HR.BLR.com is your one-stop solution for all your HR compliance and training needs. Take a no-cost, no-obligation trial and get a complimentary copy of our special report Critical HR Recordkeeping—From Hiring to Termination. It’s yours—no matter what you decide.
Can’t or Won’t Meet Expectations
… [C]onsider what each level really means. “Meets Expectations” should be obvious if you have adequately defined expectations; it’s the ones above and below that are tricky. We have only one level above—exceeding expectations is exceeding expectations—and two levels below to account for the most common reasons for not meeting expectations—won’t and can’t. “Won’t meet expectations” means you have the knowledge, skills and abilities and choose not to use them; “can’t” means you are trying and lack certain knowledge, skills, or abilities to be 100% successful.
60% of Employees Rank in the Top 20%
I agree … A few years ago, a survey was conducted in which employees were asked to rank their performance compared to others in their respective companies. The results suggested that 60% of employees rated themselves in the top 20% for performance—which is statistically impossible. If that holds true today, then most performance review conversations will continue to be challenging for managers and employees.
Currently, I am working on a rating system centered around 1, in which 1 equals meeting expectations. Ratings above 1, like 1.05 or 1.1 would be above expectations, and those below 1, like .9 or .78, would be below. I haven’t worked out the details, so I’m certain there are challenges with this approach as well, although I would hope that it might tear people away from the A, B, C, D, F grade stigma.
Extremely Defeating
… It can be extremely defeating to an employee to simply “meet expectations” with no conversation about what “exceeds expectations” or “outstanding” looks like, and no willingness from management to help them get there.
‘3’ = ‘A’
… [W]e have chosen to not only show the raw weighted average on the 5-point scale, but, we also display how that is represented as a percent. If the overall weighted score is a “3” then they see 100%, which means they are an “A” employee. That absolutely has proven to take away the inflationary pressure and results in truer, more accurate ratings for the individual performance measures.
Not C, A
Hi, your article helped me reassure my thoughts about bell curve. I never believed in that system, and after reading your article, I am certain I was right in thinking so.
Instead of rating them C, I would rate them A. The people who exceed expectations are A+ and the people who need improvement can be rated as A- or B (depending on how poorly they have performed). … This sort of rating will inspire them to work harder rather then deject them and make them complacent.
Don’t Rate Employees Against Each Other
We should not be rating employees against each other; we should be rating employees against how well they are meeting the expectations/goals of their job. ob.
In Sports, it’s Easy
In sports, just about anyone can tell you who the superstars are because performance goals have distinct measurements. The difficulty in the corporate world is the time and energy it takes to find accurate and agreeable measurements.
You Can Only Hope to Dishearten Your Employees
A 5-point scale is definitely a rating system to avoid, in my opinion. I remember my first review out of college. It was "fully meets expectations" all around with a few "exceeds expectations" and NO "outstanding". It angered me greatly! I had no idea that this average rating was supposedly a good thing! Although companies EXPECT a high quality of performance, when "outstanding" becomes an unattainable goal— you can only hope to dishearten your employees with a review.
Ranking Comes with a Pay Increase
Let’s not forget that the "A" and "B" ranking generally comes with a greater pay increase. This does not help the perception at all.
Forced Distribution Is the Best Way
Bell Curve/Forced distribution is the best way to appraise … It is very simple equation. Standards set —(Minus) Actual Performed, you’ll get the result.
Common Understanding of What Scores Mean
That’s why performance management has to evolve with culture of the organization. The administrators of performance management (read HR Practitioners) need to steer the organization towards a common understanding of what the performance appraisal scores mean, in the context of fulfilling the desired objectives or goals.
Meets Expectations Is a B+
I’d tell them that outstanding is an A+, exceeds expectations is an A-, meets expectations is a B+, needs improvement is a C-, and unsatisfactory is a D-.
Eliminate the Emotional Discussion
Since the purpose of appraisals is to reinforce/encourage expected performance or to improve performance that is not meeting expectations, why not limit the discussion to focusing on expectations rather than having an emotional discussion around A,B,C etc.?
See all the comments in their entirety here.
What is the limit on “expectation”? At some point it must saturate, reach a point where it can go no further and where no one can exceed.
One way to look at it is the case of a very competent performer who continually just meets a very high expectation. That person appears to score lower than a rising star who exceeds an expectation set much much lower on the saturation curve. A uniform reference point is missing.
Another way is to recognize the possibilty that the “expectation” point can always be moved from appraisal time to appraisal time. The rated person can be discouraged because they can never meet or exceed the moving standard.
The expectation must always be stated and defined for the period going forward. Then, at some point, the expectation must become static for the defined job. This should all be documented beforehand.
If the expectation is to be on site at 7:00am 100% of the workdays and the worker does so, how can that expectation be exceeded? Arriving early does not exceed that defined expectation. Therefore, the worker only meets expectation in that regard, which can then connote a sort of marginal or mediocre performance level.
All ratings of performance must be stated in context. Too often that requirement appears to be lost in the genral discussion.
Perhaps a rating protocol needs to be developed that assesses a person’s value to the enterprise in a given position. That could provide a rational basis for determining a raise or bonus. That development will not be easy to do.
All these responses focus on “rating the employee.” Therein lies the problem. Performance management is on-going throughout the cycle. Start with defining what are the requirements ( well-written job descriptions are always a good place to start this); then what are the standards, i.e., performance that meets expectations is___________; Peformance that Exceeds expectations includes performance that Meets Expectations + ____________; Performance that Does not Meet Expectations is ___________________. The key is Be Specific. Don’t allow an employee to fail to meet performance standards (expectations) all year, and then rate their performance as such. The best performance management system lets employees know for themselves how well they are or are not doing. No surprises.
The purpose of Performance Appraisals is to provide individual feedback relative to the organizational goals. So, why not measure the organization’s actual results against the stated goals for the period being evaluated? Where did the organization stand against its goal? This can be further broken down by department/division. Wow, no individual performance appraisals, just organizational appraisals. Wouldn’t stockholders like this better? Wouldn’t managers like this better? No time agonizing over ratings, takes all the subjectiveness out of the picture. Managements rating is a reflection of the overall organizational result. Each division’s employees shares in the success or failure of the organization’s performance.