TEAM MANAGEMENT
By Louise Dunn
A

ccording to a survey by the Corporate Executive Board, 95% of Human Resource managers say they do not like their company’s performance review process.1 Would you agree? Sixty-five percent of employees say the performance review is not relevant to their jobs. Would your employees say the same?

Sabotaging Ourselves
What makes the dreaded performance evaluation so “dreaded?” The answer is not a single issue, but rather, multiple issues, which include the following:
1. Heavily focused on activity and not outcomes.
Focusing on the activity is the result of depending on the job description for the performance review. It says in the job description that a receptionist will “communicate with clients on the phone and in person.” That is the activity. The outcome is a little different—which is how happy the clients are with the contact.2 The technician job description says they will “collect and run lab samples.” Does the tech report and record the results? Can the tech obtain client compliance with their discussion of the lab test purpose and process? Actions are not always enough; there can be more involved than simply collecting and running. Does your performance review address outcomes?
2. Reviews what happened in the past.
Many evaluations review the most recent history more so than what happened in the 10 months prior. If you bring up past performance shortcomings at the annual evaluation, were they also discussed when they occurred? Should performance issues be discussed as they occur, or is it better to hold out for the annual evaluation?
3. Too expensive in “people hours” and time-consuming.
The expense associated with annual performance evaluations includes the manager’s time to gather the information, prepare the forms, conduct any interviews with supervisors, schedule the meeting and schedule the extra coverage for the shift. How much is paid out in wages for your performance review meetings and, more importantly, is there an ROI for this effort?
There are the ever-present, conscious or not, biases that play a role in performance reviews. The “Halo bias” is when a team member is rated very high because of one thing they do really well. The “Horn bias” is the exact opposite; rated poorly in all areas because of one thing they do not do well.
4. Lacks consistency from manager to manager, hampered by personal biases.
Often, the performance review can have different results if different managers evaluate the person. There are the ever-present, conscious or not, biases that play a role in performance reviews.3 The “Halo bias” is when a team member is rated very high in all areas because of one thing they do really well. The “Horn bias” is the exact opposite; rated poorly in all areas because of one thing they do not do well. And the “Recency bias” is just that—focusing on recent behavior patterns and assuming it will continue (be they positive or negative performance behaviors). Another common bias is personal biases, such as how the manager feels about the person they are evaluating (like or dislike). Has your management team been trained about these common biases so they know how to avoid their traps?
5. Creates awkward dynamic and competition between managers, employees and co-workers.
Finally, there is the awkward dynamic between everyone. What causes us to feel awkward? Perhaps it is the feeling that the process is inadequate. Maybe it is due to the uncomfortable rank-and-yank system in which managers rank the employees against each other. As a result, many performance reviews do not make sense—business sense, problem-solving sense or personal development sense. There is nothing like a feeling of inadequacy to cause an awkward meeting.

Now that you know what is sabotaging your performance evaluation proceSs, what are the options for changing it? It is possible to benefit patient care, client service, team member performance and business success with your evaluation process.

Fixing the Process
Instead of fighting the annual performance evaluation, stop doing it! At least stop doing the annual review and switch to a “real-time” process. Numerous companies have made the switch. General Electric, famous for terminating the bottom 10% of performance rankings, ditched the idea 10 years ago and switched to a process of coaching employees and using regular feedback. Adobe has found that regular check-ins have dropped employee turnover by 30%.4 And Texas Roadhouse replaced their process with what is called GPS: Growth, Plan, and Support.1 Still not convinced?

Consider this: How many of you with Fitbits or other tracking metrics would succeed in your weight-loss or exercise program if the apps only give you a yearly report? You are blindly performing exercises and entering diet data for an entire year without knowing if it has a positive effect on the goal you hoped to achieve. Then, at the end of the year, you receive the report only to find out you failed to perform on one aspect and did great on another. Now what? How do you map out your next step? Did the medical procedure you had that past year affect your numbers? What about the fact that you started yoga? How would the exercise and diet recommendations have changed if the app knew this?

Annual performance evaluations are essentially the same thing—blindly performing a job, experiencing changes in the economy or business goals and changing personal focus on skills all affect job performance. Simply talking about it once a year isn’t helping anyone, including the business.

Here are some steps to take to change the performance evaluation process:

Step #1) Base performance evaluations on outcomes linked to the business’s strategic plans.
The first step starts with the business; the goals of the business and the key practice indicators (KPIs). What key outcomes are necessary for the business to deliver exceptional medical care, great client service and solid business growth?

For instance, the practice discovers a problem with the wages paid as a percentage of income. The decision is made to put an end to all overtime hours. At the annual review, managers are told they failed to control the expense, and the team is told that raises cannot be given. How would this scenario change with ongoing feedback? At the end of the pay cycle, the numbers are reviewed, situations resulting in overtime scheduling are discussed, options are considered, certain team members are trained to perform new tasks so as to prevent overtime, and managers are now aware and able to respond appropriately to scheduling changes. Linking performance to the strategic plans of the business is a good thing.

Blindly performing a job, experiencing changes in the economy or business goals and changing personal focus on skills all affect job performance. Simply talking about it once a year isn’t helping anyone, including the business.
Step #2) Provide ongoing feedback to the team.
Educate your managers on how to coach and communicate what is expected of team members. Managers need to assist their team with performance growth and development, and what outcomes are expected.2 Consider each person’s strengths and how they impact your client care, then develop a plan to improve their performance effectiveness and growth. Establish what steps are being taken to reach these goals; steps that are relevant to the employee’s job and personal growth.

For example, your practice heard about Fear Free and has decided to move forward with certification. None of this was discussed last year at any of the performance evaluations. Do you wait until the annual evaluations this year? Of course not! You need to get moving on this so you inform the team about the plan and map out the modules that everyone needs to take. Now, do you wait until the annual review to see how everyone is doing? No! You organize regular updates, training sessions and reviews, and you monitor how the implementation process is coming along and confirm what resources different team members need to complete the goals.

What is important to understand is that real-time feedback is fluid, much like what is going on in the industry. Changes in the economy and medical developments can occur quickly. You need to be able to respond to these changes, and you will be able to shift employee goals throughout the year as needed. Waiting until the annual evaluation does not allow you to do this and instead puts the business at risk of delivering poor service, in addition to conducting irrelevant performance discussions based on goals set almost a year ago.5

Developing an Action Plan
To get started with real-time feedback, you need to be organized. It can be as simple as an excel sheet, or it can be as extensive as a program purchased from a vendor specializing in tracking employee performance. Many performance metrics can easily be reviewed by checking in with team members every quarter, or more frequently based on the goal.

How many times have managers filled out lengthy forms only to have them filed and forgotten? The real-time feedback process enables smaller segments to be discussed more frequently, progress noted and roadblocks removed.3 Does this real-time feedback remove the “dread” from dreaded performance evaluations? Let’s review…

  • Focus has been shifted to outcomes.
  • What is happening now is reviewed, which is part of business strategy and personal improvement.
  • It’s not as time-consuming to conduct quick updates.
  • Consistency is improved, as everyone knows what is expected.
  • Communication between managers and team members is improved.

Do not be one of those companies that spends time on inadequate annual evaluations; instead, spend time on developing the skills and knowledge of your team in real time.

References:
  1. Meinert, D. (2015, April 1) Is It Time to Put the Performance Review on a PIP? SHRM. https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-magazine/pages/0415-qualitative-performance-reviews.aspx
  2. Kenny, G. (2016, February 2). Fixing Performance Appraisal is About More than Ditching Annual Reviews. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2016/02/fixing-performance-appraisal-is-about-more-than-ditching-annual-reviews
  3. Wilkie, D. (2015, December). If the Annual Performance Review is on Its Way Out, What Can Replace It? SHRM. https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/hr-topics/employee-relations/pages/performance-reviews-dead.aspx
  4. Duggan, K. (2015, December 15). Six Companies that are Redefining Performance Management. Fast Company. https://www.fastcompany.com/3054547/six-companies-that-are-redefining-performance-management
  5. Zillman, C. (2016, February 1). IBM is Blowing Up Its Annual Performance Review. Fortune. http://fortune.com/2016/02/01/ibm-employee-performance-reviews/
Louise Dunn
Louise Dunn is a renowned award-winning speaker, writer and consultant. She brings over 40 years of in-the-trenches experience and her business education to veterinary management. Louise is founder and CEO of Snowgoose Veterinary Management Consulting. SVMC works with veterinarians who want to develop a strategic plan that consistently produces results. Most recently Louise received many awards including the WVC Educator of the Year numerous times and VetPartner’s The Life Time achievement Award in January 2016.
Back to Issue