COMMUNICATIONS ESSAY
genec
Essay2COMMdirections.pdf
CHAPTER 7
Providing Performance Feedback
�e ��
�
:E
�\&\ Effec,.
✓ /,
Communication Corporate Culture
Ethics
• Strategize
'°� tfl
f/a
Feedback is one of the fundamental facts of life and ideas of science, yet
only in the last fifty years have we recognized its all-pervasive presence.
The idea is simple: A feedback mechanism registers the actual state of
a system, compares it to the desired state, then uses the comparison to
correct the state of the system. Feedback is goal-oriented . ... Movement is the essence of feedback. It implies purpose and progress. Like a walker on
a high wire, it continually achieves balance in order to achieve something
beyond balance. It can never rest.
-Horace Freeland Judson
151
Communicating for Managerial Effectiveness: Problems, Strategies, Solutions By Phillip G. Clampitt
152 SECTION 2: COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES
W hat if there was no feedback? What if feedback took a Rip Van Winkle
sojourn? Cells would not know when to stop multiplying. The economy
would fly out of kilter. Without feedback, the world as we know it would
not exist; the high-wire walker would fall. No system can survive without feedback.
Yet, many employees feel that they are expected to do just that. Performance
feedback has surfaced as a problem area in every organization in which my col
leagues and I have conducted communication assessments. For example, more than
60% of the employees in our database expressed dissatisfaction with the perfor
mance feedback system. 1 In interviews with employees, many made comments
such as, "Performance evaluations don't really exist here. If they do, I don't know
what they look like. It's like pulling teeth." In short, there is probably no more
pervasive and perplexing difficulty than how to effectively provide feedback to
54%
of employees say their performance reviews are useless
43%
of employees feel they don't get enough guidance to improve their performance
60%
of employees are dissatisfied with the performance feedback system
43%
of employees are unsatisfied with information about how they are judged
61%
of employees believe their organiza tion tolerates poor performers
43%
of employees say their good work goes unrecognized
employees about their performance.
The cynic might ask, "So what?" Does perfor
mance feedback actually make any difference? Indeed,
I mentioned to one vice president that employees
felt they did not get adequate feedback. He responded,
"They get their paychecks every two weeks, don't
they?" Researchers have a more critical view.
Performance feedback has a high correlation with
job performance and satisfaction. In fact, employees
indicated that performance feedback had a greater
impact on their performance than every other
communication variable, including the communi
cation climate, coworker communication, and even
supervisor-subordinate relationships.2 In one study,
employees were asked to recall a specific incident
that caused their productivity to increase. More than
65% of the employees mentioned some kind of feed
back from management, such as a written note of
praise from the company president or an extra
bonus for effectively completing a challenging task.3
In short, employees like to know how they are doing.
For some, feedback serves as a reward or motivation.
For others, it provides useful information to correct
behavior or a way to build self-esteem. Meeting these
sometimes divergent needs requires a sound feed
back system and skillful managers. These issues are
the focal points of this chapter.
Performance Feedback Principles
The following principles provide a solid foundation for the more specific discussion
about creating an effective feedback system.
Chapter 7: Providing Performance Feedback 153
Everyone, Whether They Acknowledge It or Not, Has Performance Standards
In every task, duty, and decision, employees assess their own level of effectiveness. If
deemed satisfactory, they seek to maintain it. If they fall short, they make changes.
After cyclist Lance Armstrong won his fifth grueling Tour de France by only sixty-one
seconds (covering over 3,400 kilometers in twenty-three days), he admitted he was
not in optimal condition and vowed to train even harder. 4 It worked. He rode to a
sixth title and an unprecedented seventh. T hese are very high standards, indeed.
T here are, of course, other people who are happy to work to minimal standards, hop
ing to slip by and not to get fired. Clearly, the spectrum of performance standards
ranges from the nominal to the commonplace to the extraordinary. Regardless, per
formance standards are a nonoptional part of the human experience; they guide our
behavior, determine our aspirations, and ultimately define our essence. Effective
managers take on the challenge of elevating their employees' standards.
High Performance Standards Foster Employee Development and Organizational Viability
Employees generally benefit from high performance standards. T hose who are
challenged to achieve their potential tend to be more satisfied and productive.
Self-actualization, perched atop Abraham Maslow's famous Hierarchy of Human
Needs, represents the ultimate desire of employees. The thoughtful philosopher
and poet Jacob Bronowski beautifully expressed it:
The most powerful drive in the ascent of man is his pleasure in his own skill. He
loves to do what he does well, and having done it well, he loves to do it better.
You see it in his science. You see it in the magnificence with which he carves and
builds, the loving care, the gaiety, the effrontery. The monuments are supposed
to commemorate kings and religions, heroes, dogmas, but in the end the man
they commemorate is the builder.5
Most people aspire to fulfill their potential. Companies should not frustrate this
desire but seek to encourage it by offering challenging tasks and high standards. To
sustain performance in this demanding atmosphere, employees' efforts and accom
plishments must be acknowledged, supported, and rewarded.
When not properly challenged, employees lose their motivation and organiza
tions lose their viability. A company will eventually lose market share if competitors
can provide better products or services faster or at lower cost. It happens all the
time. Just look at what Apple does. With the development of their iPhone, the sales
of competing cell phones started to evaporate. Likewise, Apple's iTunes virtual store
offers music selectivity and timely service that cannot be duplicated by the tradi
tional CD. When organizations have lower standards of reliability, performance,
and service than their competition, the results are inevitable and often terminal.
Companies and managers need have no apologies for high performance standards.
154 SECTION 2: COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES
All Employees "Receive" Feedback about Their Performance
Even if employees do not receive explicit feedback, they make inferences about the
acceptability of their work. From the organizational context, employees extract
messages and come to conclusions such as, "No news is good news;' or "I haven't
heard any complaints, so I must be doing OK:' When employees fail to receive
explicit feedback, they infer it and continue to perform at levels they deem accept
able to themselves-but not necessarily to their organization. Or to put it another
way, a manager cannot not "give" performance feedback.
Unfortunately, this inferential method of feedback often encourages employees
to make inaccurate speculations. Consider, for example, managers who sugarcoat
their feedback by overemphasizing the positive and downplaying the negative.6
Employees usually assume the best, in which case true problems go undetected and
uncorrected. Or employees may assume the worst, often producing stress, anxiety,
and alienation.
The Ideal Feedback System Drives Employees to Identify, Perform, and Commit to the Evolving Performance Standards
Employees and managers do not always share the same standards. New employees
often have quite different standards than their managers because of their different
backgrounds, training, and experiences. Indeed, researchers have shown that man
agers have the greatest impact on their employees' standards, values, and expecta
tions during the initial training period.7 After that, employees tend to be more
influenced by their coworkers and other organizational factors. As seen in Figure 7.1,
if proper selection procedures have been used, employees will share, to some extent,
the performance standards of their managers. The training process should result in
a more complete sharing of expectations, therefore increasing the degree of over
lap. The standards may be altered as situations change, the manager matures, and
the employee develops. Yet, the objective endures: close the gap between the
standards of the employee and the manager.
The employee must not only know the standards but also perform as expected and
be committed to these standards. For example, a professor may set a standard for pro
fessionalism in writing, which might include "zero tolerance" for spelling errors.
Clearly, the professor can encourage professional writing standards, but exhortations
are useless unless the students actually turn in papers of this quality. The professor
aims for knowledge, performance, and commitment. Ideally, each student learns the
appropriate standards, turns the knowledge into action, and transforms the action
into resolve. Likewise, effective managers want their employees to internalize the stan
dards instead of depending on external commentary by others.
Even as employees seek to perform up to the standards, new standards will
emerge. Why? Because the competitive environment changes, technology improves,
and organizational needs evolve. Thus, managers naturally need to reconsider the
usefulness of the current performance standards (see Figure 7.1). Are the present
Goal: common
standards
Ideal Feedback Process
External Focus
Chapter 7: Providing Performance Feedback 155
Feedback from Environment
• industry standards • customer complaints • business trends
Manager's Standards
Employee's Standards
Internal Focus
• training
Time
Feedback from Organization
• daily feedback • performance appraisal
standards sufficient to meet corporate goals? To be competitive? Have the employees
suggested any new standards? These are the kinds of questions that must be asked
regularly to ensure the viability of the standards.
Implementing a Successful Feedback System
The principles previously discussed provide a useful background for developing an
effective feedback system. There are many systems and methods for providing
employees with feedback. Yet, ultimately the success of any system hinges on four
basic questions.
1. Do employees know their job responsibilities?
2. Do employees know the standards of evaluation?
3. Do employees receive useful informal feedback?
4. Do employees receive useful feedback from performance appraisals?
156 SECTION 2: COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES
There cannot be a weak link in the chain. The answer to each of these questions must be affirmative for the feedback system to work.
Do Employees Know Their Job Responsibilities?
Dynamic organizations tend to experience the most difficulties in this area. Our research revealed that almost 20% of the employees felt unsatisfied with informa tion about their job requirements. Clearly, if employees do not know their job responsibilities, they are probably not doing their job.8 How could this happen? Employees may have never read their job descriptions. Or the situation may have changed so much that the job descriptions are outdated. In addition, the employee may get conflicting messages about the actual job duties from coworkers and the supervisor. As a result, effective managers set up some kind of formal mechanism either in the appraisal interview or in a separate discussion-to ensure that employees understand their job duties and expectations. Either way, employees learn how they are expected to add value to the organization.
Do Employees Know the Standards by Which They Are Being Evaluated?
Research suggests that 43% of the employees are unsatisfied with information about how they are being judged. 9 For example, one manager at a bank said, "I know my job, my manager knows I know my job, but I haven't a clue how he evaluates me:' An employee may know her job is to troubleshoot for an engineering division but may be completely unaware of how her performance will be judged. Is it the number of problems she solves that counts? Does the complexity of the problem matter? These are questions about standards of evaluation, not about job duties. Employees need to see the yardstick.
In almost every job, at least a few quantifiable criteria can be discussed with employees. As one performance criterion, a bank teller may have to establish a designated number of new IRA accounts. But there are also qualitative aspects of ever y job that are equally important. Bank tellers must be concerned with effective customer relations. Some overly enthusiastic behavioral psychologist might argue that even this can be quantified. A few businesses, for instance, insist that the employee smile at the customer a designated number of times while conducting a transaction and conclude with a canned, "Have a nice day." These dictates may work for robots, but they quickly wear thin with employees and clients. Thus, I do not share in the behaviorist's mad rush to quantify everything that can be counted. Harry Levinson, a noted management psychologist and clinical professor of psychology at the Harvard Medical School, perceptively commented, "The greater the emphasis on measurement and quantification, the more likely the subtle, non measurable elements of the task will be sacrificed. Quality of performance frequently, therefore, loses out to quantification." 10
Consequently, effective managers use a combination of quantitative and quali tative measures in evaluating an employee's performance. Still, many managers
Chapter 7: Providing Performance Feedback 157
resist having discussions of their criteria. Why? First, some feel that specifying
criteria inhibits their flexibility in evaluating employees. So what? The manager's
flexibility should be less important than creating a high-performing work climate.
Moreover, flexibility usually emerges in the qualitative criteria. Second, some managers
feel ill-equipped to discuss criteria, especially qualitative measures. Clearly, these dis
cussions are not easy. Some managers may be unable to articulate their expectations
and their intuitive sensibilities that are honed by experience. They may also have to
commit to a series of discussions with employees rather than a single meeting. Yet,
effective managers willingly accept these challenges because they know how ener
gizing well-defined yardsticks can be to employees.
Do Employees Receive Useful Informal Feedback?
In the long run, the day-to-day "pat on the back" or reprimand may have a greater
impact on employee performance than any other communication event.
Regrettably, most employees are not satisfied with the daily feedback they receive
and can relate to an airline employee who said, " [ Giving] specific, positive rein
forcement is management's worst problem. They can't seem to praise anyone. You'd
think it was costing them money." The problem pervades organizations across the
spectrum, from service-oriented companies to manufacturing firms. Indeed, more
than 40% of the employees in our databank were dissatisfied with the extent to
which their efforts were recognized by the organization. There are two primary
reasons for this problem.
First, many managers do not take the time to give regular feedback. The inherently
different perspectives of employees and managers compound the difficulty.
For example, assume that a manager of a twenty-person department decides to
spend three minutes every week giving honest feedback to each employee. The
manager invests one hour each week in this process. Yet to the employee, three minutes
a week is a mere commercial break. Thus, managers almost always overestimate,
at least from the employees' perspective, the amount of daily feedback they
communicate.
Second, many managers simply do not notice employee performance unless there
are difficulties. Managers get more credit for problems solved than problems
avoided. No wonder they are quick to comment when employees stumble but slow
to praise a job well done. Employees want to be recognized, and they bemoan the
"I only hear when things go wrong" managerial philosophy.
Despite these inherent difficulties, the effective manager allocates time to pro
viding routine feedback. As Jack and Suzy Welch say, "You may be running
a billion-dollar business, moving resources around the globe, and suavely narrating
Power Point presentations to top management, but you simply do not have the right
to call yourself a manager if you are not regularly telling your people what they are
doing well and how they need to improve."11 In the long run, proper feedback
actually saves managerial time. Why? Corrective feedback can stop small problems
from growing into bigger ones. In fact, the daily pat on the back or minor correction
can stimulate employee growth and development.
158 SECTION 2: COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES
Do Employees Receive Useful Feedback from Performance Appraisals?
Much ink has been spilled over the issue of performance appraisals. Business
journals, periodicals, and books are filled with discussions on how to more effec
tively conduct the performance review. And with good reason; there is probably no
greater area of employee dissatisfaction. In fact, although most organizations main
tain a formal performance appraisal process, few achieve their objectives. 12 This dis
gruntled employee expresses the sentiments of many:
My immediate supervisor felt it was her duty to give me my evaluation as required
once a year. It was handed to me with, "I'll discuss it later." When I asked her,
"Why not now?" she said, "I don't have time." This was my year's work and it
was no big deal! It was to me.
Other complaints abound. Unfair rating scales, lack of objectivity, and lack of
specific examples to back up the evaluation are just a few of the ones frequently
mentioned. 13 But this does not mean that employees want to avoid the formal
appraisal. Employees want this kind of feedback. In fact, despite problems, one
survey found that 90% of employees reacted favorably to the concept of a formal
evaluation. 14 There are a variety of reasons for problems with appraisal systems, but
three are particularly noteworthy.
First, some managers resist the appraisal process because it is used to accomplish
multiple goals that are sometimes incompatible (see Table 7.1). One airline we inves
tigated used the appraisal process to simultaneously provide feedback about
employees' past job performance, as well as to determine their promotional poten
tial and make salary adjustments. Many of the managers felt the variety of goals
encouraged distortions, such as inflated ratings and overly positive comments.
Some managers did not want to hurt employees' long-term promotion opportuni
ties, so they made vague general comments. Others were less virtuous. One manager
took a Machiavellian approach, giving a troublesome employee high marks to
promote him out of his department. That is, of course, one way to get rid of
a problem-give it to someone else.
Second, many managers feel compelled to inflate ratings. It might be called the
Lake Wobegon phenomenon, "where everyone is good-looking and all the employees
are above average." Part of the problem lies in the natural competition between
different departments. Many managers feel that other department managers rate
their employees highly, and if they do not do the same, then their employees will be
penalized in the long run. Another part of the problem lies in the meanings
attached to the numbers or categories typically used in appraisal forms. In one
study, we asked a group of managers from the same company to respond to a series
of precise questions about what they meant when they used terms such as above
average, average, and below average on their appraisal forms. We found many discrep
ancies. One of the more striking was the meaning of the word average. More than 60%
of the managers believed it meant "the employee completed all jobs satisfactorily;'
Chapter 7: Providing Performance Feedback 159
Potential Objectives of Appraisal Systems
.·
, .. Objec�ive Concern .
Make salary adjustments Salary decisions are rarely based solely on performance.
Factors such as market conditions, length of service,
and corporate economic outlook affect the decision.
Determine promotion An employee may perform one job with a high
potential degree of competence but be unsuitable for greater
responsibility.
"Grade" past At times, a "grade" may not motivate employees. It
performance may also fail to uncover important reasons for
performance levels.
Motivate Many managers leave out the "bad news" when
trying to motivate employees.
Improve performance Sometimes, managers are so "problem oriented" that
they fail to effectively and specifically praise employees.
whereas 37% felt it meant that "performance was uneven, some above average and
some below." 15 Clearly, such discrepancies can lead to uneven evaluations.
Third, many managers resist the appraisal process because they feel that they are
"playing God." Douglas McGregor expressed it eloquently:
Managers are uncomfortable when they are put in the position of "playing God."
The respect we hold for the inherent value of the individual leaves us distressed
when we must take responsibility for judging the personal worth of a fellow man.
Yet the conventional approach to performance appraisal forces us not only to
make such judgments and to see them acted upon but also to communicate
them to those we have judged. Small wonder we resist! 16
Understandably, managers try to avoid situations involving the deity-to-sinner kind
of relationship. Yet, in many cases, this fear of "playing God" masks a deeper prob
lem of an inability or unwillingness to face conflict.
Regardless of the actual reason for the reticence, managers are destined to
"provide" some kind of feedback. That changes the question from "Should I provide
feedback?" to "What kind of feedback is useful?" Or, more specifically, "Did my
feedback contribute to the employee's growth?" Furthermore, providing objectively
based judgments need not imply a divine verdict of a person's worth. The alterna
tives are worse. Harold Mayfield put the matter in perspective:
Is there one of us who has not kicked himself for some inglorious episode in
our human relationships? This risk I believe to be one of the prices we must
160 SECTION 2: COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES
pay for any attempt at serious communications. Against it, we must weigh the
cost of silence. It, too, leaves scars.17
Communicating Performance Feedback
Providing effective informal and formal performance feedback may well be the
singular characteristic distinguishing the merely adequate manager from the superior
one. The skillful manager addresses two essential aspects of this vital communicative
task: the method and the message.
The Method
Effective managers carefully hone their feedback to employees. They strategically
incorporate the following in the appraisal process.
Use Self-Appraisal and Task-Inherent Feedback. Commissioned salespeople are
acutely aware of their sales figures. In this case, a supervisor may not need to com
ment on the discrepancy between goal and performance level. Rather, the supervi
sor's role becomes more of a coach and counselor. In fact, researchers have isolated
five potential sources of feedback and ranked their utility to employees. The most
important, in order, are oneself, the task, supervisors, coworkers, and the organiza
tion.18 Employees are more likely to accept feedback from those who have directly
experienced their work and whom they deem objective and credible. No wonder
self-appraisal and task-inherent feedback top the list. So the wise course for a man
ager might be to create mechanisms that encourage employees to conduct self
appraisals based on feedback from the task itself. Researchers, for example, have
determined that computer-generated performance feedback often improves pro
duction worker effectiveness more than supervisory feedback. 19 Such methods are
a subtle way to augment the appraisal process.
Seize Every Opportunity to Provide Employee Feedback. The One-Minute Manager
has dominated the best-seller lists much longer than the title might suggest. The
premise is simple. "Catch" employees doing the right things and tell them.
Admonish them on the spot when you find them doing the wrong things.
The timing and informality are critical because these one-minute discussions
provide helpful feedback in a nonthreatening environment. Corrections can be
made quickly and core company values can be specifically reinforced. In fact,
several one-minute chats may do more good than the most carefully planned
appraisal interview. This may explain why the one-minute manager's advice
endures over time.
Decide on a Useful Technique to Formally Assess Employee Performance. Essay
evaluations, rating scales, ranking methods, and critical-incident techniques are
Chapter 7: Providing Performance Feedback 161
just a few of the options. 20 The specific objectives of the system should dictate the
type of approach (see Table 7.2). If the organization wants to encourage employee
growth, then written essays about employee performance would prove useful. To
promote a competitive spirit within a sales force, for example, ranking employees
may work best. The most widely used approach, rating scales, are the default option.
In recent years, 360-degree reviews have gained popularity. The employee at the
hub of a 360-degree review receives feedback from every angle-up, down, and all
around. 21 This may prove invaluable because subordinates, peers, or even cus
tomers may be in a better position than supervisors to provide useful feedback
about certain issues such as leadership. Moreover, the employee cannot easily dis
miss criticism independently garnered from a number of different sources. On the
flip side, 360-degree reviews are time-consuming and potentially confusing to the
employee. When used widely in organizations, they may encourage gamesmanship
Appraisal Techniques
Method Strengths Weaknesses
Rating scale Allows comparison between Might be disagreement over
employees without forcing meanings of the numbers.
distinctions. Easy to use.
Essay Allows appraiser flexibility to Is difficult to compare
uniquely characterize each employees.
employee. Might have variances between
raters in level of specificity.
Rank order Creates clear distinctions Forces unfair or artificial
between employees. Often comparisons between
used for salary purposes. employees.
Critical Focuses on employee behavior. Takes time to record every
incidents Avoids appraisals of employee incident.
personality. May cause manager to delay
Provides specific evidence. daily feedback.
May encourage an
overemphasis on the peaks
and valleys of performance,
rather than typical
performance.
360-degree Provides various points of view. Is time-consuming.
Underscores the importance May encourage
of all the relationships an "gamesmanship."
employee must effectively May be potentially confusing manage. to employee.
162 SECTION 2: COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES
with such behind-the-scenes deals as ''I'll rate you high, if you rate me high." It is
difficult to be both peer and judge, so many organizations use the 360-degree
review for developmental purposes, separating it from the salary review process.22
Even if managers do not "have a say" in the evaluation methods, they should
be aware of the limitations and advantages of the various options. In fact, some
managers supplement the mandatory system with other "homegrown" measures.
Regardless of the method used, the organization needs to commit to provide
training for the appraisers. This helps ensure that practice harmonizes with
purpose. It also cultivates more uniformity and fairness in the rating process by
limiting distortions that may emerge from "political games" in the organization.
Importantly, training can protect the organization from a potential legal minefield
(see Table 7.3). For instance, McDonnell Douglas was sued for laying off an
employee who believed that age, not performance, was the determining factor. The
court sided with the company because appraisal records showed that her perfor
mance was consistently and objectively rated below that of her peers.23 In short,
successful organizations, just like the courts, recognize the value of well-conceived
and well-executed performance appraisals.
Discuss with Employees the Exact Purpose of Appraisal Interviews. At the outset of the
interview, every employee should be reminded of the appraisal's purpose as well as
how the information will be used. This helps new employees determine what type
Minimizing Potential Legal Challenges
Action Rationale
Train appraisers to focus on Training increases perceived fairness in the process
behavioral, observable, and and should curtail more subjective evaluations. The
objective evidence. courts will not support terminating someone
because of a personality conflict.
Use consistent standards The courts frown on a seemingly aberrant review
and apply them fairly to all to justify termination. A history of documented
employees. problems is very helpful to support the
organization's case.
Encourage employee Participation encourages dialogue that
participation in the process. could be used to correct misperceptions and
misunderstandings that may occur in the process.
Allow employees to respond Distortions in the review process are bound to
to reviews. occur for any number of reasons. Providing the
employee the ability to respond in writing acts as
a safety valve for the process.
Document the process and Written evidence carries greater weight than
review. a supervisor's memory.
Chapter 7: Providing Performance Feedback 163
of information is appropriate to share. Even though this may become a bit repetitive
over the years, it helps ensure that employees are continually focused on the objec
tives. Setting a specific time and place for the interview sends a powerful secondary
message that the discussion has great significance. Interruptions, like phone calls,
should be avoided. These may sound like small matters, but they often prove
significant to employees.
Assign Employees Specific Preparations for the Appraisal Process. Many organizations
provide appraisal forms for both the manager and the subordinate, which are parallel
in format. The manager rates the employee's performance in designated areas, and the
employee rates his or her own performance on a similar form. These documents
should be completed before the actual appraisal interview and should include task
inherent measures. This step reinforces the importance of the process while ensuring
that employees come to the meeting fully prepared. The two documents can serve as
a stimulus for focused discussion on the employee's performance.
The Message
The right method is just one part of the equation. Wise managers also think seriously
about the message and tone because they recognize how both influence employee
reactions. These issues are discussed in this section.
Contemplate and Capitalize on the Employee's Unique Abilities, Qualities, and
Motivations. Traditionally, managers "motivated" employees by rewarding or pun
ishing specific performance behaviors. These behavioral techniques encourage the
repetition of the desired behavior. However, repetition may actually become dys
functional because situations change and novel contingencies arise. There is
a better, more strategic approach. Character qualities such as resilience, thought
fulness, attentiveness, flexibility, discretion, sensitivity, thoroughness, and diligence
profoundly affect the quality of organizational life. Any opportunity to reinforce
these values should be seized by the manager. But that first requires that managers
discern the unique capabilities of each employee.
Great statesmen, like great managers, seem to have special insights into the
uniqueness of those with whom they work closely. Winston Churchill, one of the
greatest leaders of all time, wrote the following of his rival, friend, fellow cabinet
minister, and eventual prime minister:
[Lloyd George] possessed two characteristics that were in harmony with this
period of convulsion. First, a power of living in the present, without taking
short views. Every day for him was filled with the hope and the impulse
of a fresh beginning. He surveyed the problems of each morning with an eye
unobstructed by preconceived opinions, past utterances, or previous
disappointment and defeats. In times of peace such a mood is not always
admirable, nor often successful for long. But in the intense crisis when the world
was a kaleidoscope, when every month all the values and relations were changed
164 SECTION 2: COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES
by some prodigious event and its measureless reactions, this inexhaustible mental
agility, guided by the main purpose of Victory, was a rare advantage. His intuition
fitted the crisis better than the logical reasoning of more rigid minds.24
Insights of this sort can only emerge from keen observation, extraordinary sen
sitivity to a person's character, and contemplation about the individual's unique
ness. Employees receiving this type of praise perceive it as sincere, thoughtful, and
significant. This is not enough, however. Otherwise, all biographers would be great
statesmen. Leaders must also have the ability to transform insight into action. In
addition to Churchill's extraordinary discernment into Lloyd George's qualities, he
also demonstrated an amazing perceptiveness into situations where the prime
minister would be most effective. Herein rests the challenge for world-class managers.
When I asked Paul McCann, the vice president of operations of Appleton Coated
LLC, about this issue, he remarked, "Every employee brings a unique set of talents
to the job at hand and because of that, each employee must be given a customized
evaluation so as to accentuate the positive contributions and develop the areas for
improvement. This is the best way to take advantage of the diversity within a working
team and ensure that the organization is maximizing the effectiveness of each indi
vidual. Trying to shoehorn everyone into the same stale set of objectives can lead to
mediocre performance and an unhappy workforce."25
Effective managers have their antennae tuned to the natural motivators of their
employees and know how to link the motivators to critical objectives.26 In the
appraisal interview in Figure 7.2, the manager fails to pick up on the fact that the
employee is highly motivated to provide quality service to the customer. The man
ager could have linked the benefits of being organized and educating customers on
Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) to providing better customer service. The
manager might have said, "I'm impressed by your commitment to quality customer
service. By being organized you can better service the customer. For instance, you
will be able to find vital information more quickly, which will translate into speedier
service for the customers." Such linkages may be difficult to execute, but they reap
great dividends.
Link Specific Behaviors to Valued Qualities and Abilities. The employee who submits
an insightful proposal that has anticipated numerous potential objections could be
praised for an "excellent report." Such a comment might encourage future reports
of this type. But more could be said: "Your report is remarkable. It shows a quality
of thoroughness and insightfulness that we value in this organization." The man
ager reinforces a specific behavior (report writing) but, more important, highlights
the quality of thoroughness and insightfulness. Linking the specific behavior to the
character qualities encourages employees not only to continue writing quality
reports but also to find other novel situations where they can exhibit the desired
qualities. The charm of a character quality, like "thoroughness" and "insightful
ness," lies in its ambiguity. It can be applied in so many different situations that
even the wisest manager could not anticipate all the possible applications (see Figure
7.3). Such an approach brings to bear the naturally motivating creative instincts in
people. It has the indelible mark of the human touch.
Speaker
MANAGER:
EMPLOYEE:
MANAGER:
EMPLOYEE:
MANAGER:
EMPLOYEE:
MANAGER:
EMPLOYEE:
Chapter 7: Providing Performance Feedback 165
Sample Appraisal Interview
Dialogue Commentary
Hi Chris. Welcome. Please sit down.
Thank you.
As you know, this is the regularly scheduled The manager does an
performance appraisal that I conduct with each effective job of orienting the
employee. The purpose of this talk is to review your employee but could discuss
performance during the past year. Actually, there how the information in the
should be few surprises because I've tried to keep interview will be used.
you informed throughout the year. You've read over
my report, I assume, so I want to spend our time
discussing some critical areas and answer any of
your questions.
Fine, that sounds good because I do have some
questions.
I'd like to start with the positive areas. Let me just The manager has clearly
list your greatest strengths: thought about the strengths
1. You seem to be able to handle the cash of the employee.
drawer without assistance or errors.
2. You have the ability to explain savings The manager could discuss
products effectively to customers. specific communication
abilities that are valued by a
company that stresses
"customer service."
3. Your general attitude toward the job is The manager could isolate a
quite positive. quality, such as enthusiasm,
In general, I'm impressed by your abilities after that is essential for the job,
being here only nine months. and provide examples of how
Chris exhibited this quality
Well, thanks-I've really tried hard. I enjoy The employee reveals that
working here and that really helps. My coworkers coworkers are a source of
are really a joy to work with-they make it easy. motivation.
Now I'd like to explore with you three areas of The manager does not bring
improvement. First, I've rated you average in up specific evidence or the
organizational abilities. At times, you seem harm done by poor
unorganized. organization.
Well, I just try to do so much-sometimes I don't The employee sees no
take time to keep things organized. I mean, I try relationship between
to keep my papers straight and stuff-but my organization and customer
priority is on customer service. service.
(Continued)
166 SECTION 2: COMMUNICATION CHALLE NGES
(Continued)
Speaker Dialogue
MANAGER: Oh, but I still think some improvement is needed
here.
EMPLOYEE: I've always had this problem and frankly, it seems
more important to serve customer needs.
MANAGER: The second area that I'd like to see improvement
in is cross-selling. We set a goal of cross-selling
seven IRA accounts. You actually sold five IRA
accounts. I'd like to see that up to par next year.
You know this is a high priority in the business.
EMPLOYEE: I know I've kind of failed in that area, but
sometimes it's so hard-I feel kind of awkward
mentioning it-I just try to be friendly. I don't
want to offend the customer. I feel like I really do
service the customer effectively.
MANAGER: Well, you do, but I'd still like to see more
cross-selling. The third area is bringing in new
customers. We set a goal of ten new customers-
I have only five new customers credited to your
efforts this year.
EMPLOYEE: You know that goal is practically impossible-all
my friends are already customers, and I just don't
know what to do.
MANAGER: I understand-this isn't really criticism. Overall,
you're doing a fine job-I want to emphasize
that! For only being here nine months, I'm
impressed. Really!
EMPLOYEE: So you think I'm doing a good job!
MANAGER: Yes, basically, yes. You are making progress-I'm
pleased. Do you have any questions?
EMPLOYEE: No, it's basically what I expected-I mean you
always tell me I'm doing a good job. Thanks.
Commentary
The manager should show
some link between
organization, working well
with coworkers, and effective
customer service.
The employee fails to take
responsibility for the problem.
The manager ignores the
employee's denial and fails to
offer useful suggestions. The
manager does provide specific
evidence to back up this
evaluation.
The manager misses the
opportunity to link the sale of
IRA accounts to customer
service.
The employee attributes the
problem to the goal, not to
self.
The manager soft-pedals the
criticism.
The employee seeks out
a positive evaluation.
The manager obliges.
Speaker ., . .·
Dialogue
Chapter 7: Providing Performance Feedback 167
.
Commentary o ,
'' , , ' ',<
MANAGER: Well, there are some areas of improvement. The manager is halfheartedly
fulfilling an obligation but is
not trying to change Chris's
behavior.
EMPLOYEE: Yes, I know, but basically, I'm doing a good job. I mean The employee feels good and
I like my job and the people I work with. Is that all? sees no need to change.
MANAGER: Yes, I guess so, except I need you to sign this The manager feels relieved
form. because it's over.
In fact, managers frequently fail to praise employees with sufficient specificity.27
Every manager must be able to confidently answer this question: Can I prove my
assessment? The problem usually does not occur on the negative items but, surpris
ingly, with the positive issues. Typically, praise runs along these lines: "Good job,"
Linking Praise to Attributes
Manager's Feedback
"Excellent report:'
Manager's Feedback
"Excellent report. I appreciate the thoroughness of your research;'
Less effective process
Employee's Employee's Annual Report Inference Future Behavior
/ Appearance of report?
ACME
?ca __.,;:,r Suggestions?
---._ Thoroughness? •
� Data analysis?
More effective process
Annual Report
ACME
Employee's Employee's Inference Future Behavior
Will be thorough in
/ New product reviews
The company 1 _...,. Presentations t ov a ues the board thoroughness. �
Interviews with job applicants
'
168 SECTION 2: COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES
"Way to go;' or ''At-a-boy." This kind of ambiguous praise tends to be more evaluative
than descriptive. Descriptive praise tends to be more effective.28 For example, instead
of saying, "You really are effective with customers;' a more useful and descriptive com
ment might be, "You really have an ability to communicate effectively with customers.
The way you smile and ask pertinent questions shows your sensitivity to their needs."
These remarks demonstrate that the manager pays attention to the employee's perfor
mance and recognizes the employee's unique contribution.
Avoid the Most Typical Appraisal Biases. Table 7.4 reviews a number of factors that
may inhibit the clarity of the manager's thinking about the appraisal process.29 It
takes effort, insight, and dedication to overcome these barriers, but the rewards to
managers, employees, and the organization alike are many-fold. Leniency is by far
the most common bias. Business Week reported, for example, that more than 70%
of managers admit they have difficulty providing tough performance reviews to
underachieving employees.30 Why? Let me highlight two major reasons.
First, managers resist appearing judgmental; consequently, they distort their
feedback in a positive direction.31 For example, in the appraisal interview in Figure 7.2,
note how the manager says, "This isn't really criticism. Overall, you're doing
a fine job." On the other hand, employees seek to maintain positive self-esteem and
t ypically see negative information as more positive than it actually is.32 They often
attribute problems to factors beyond their control.
Second, poor performers actively try to short-circuit criticism by seeking out
positive comments.33 Note, for example, how in Figure 7.2, the employee implies
that there is simply not enough time to be organized. In other words, Chris denies
personal responsibility. Poor performers may even build the excuses into their
inquiries or ask leading questions about their performance.34 Notice that Chris's
final remarks end with a question that almost begs the manager for confirmation
of an overly glowing assessment. Therefore, the manager and employee, by virtue
of their predispositions, co-create a process in which each party inevitably draws
seemingly reasonable but decidedly warped impressions. Employees "may hold
positively inflated views of their organizational performance."35 But managers fre
quently have an equally skewed view and feel that employees have a clear under
standing of the areas of improvement when, in fact, they do not.
Wise managers resist both of these powerful forces. They seek to control the
process so employees have an unclouded view of their performance while carefully
avoiding needless damage to self-esteem. Charles Ames, the former CEO of three
companies, summarized the manager's responsibility best:
There is nothing kind about glossing over weaknesses that could be corrected if
the individual were aware of them. Nor is there anything kind about deluding
someone into thinking that he or she is doing well or has greater opportunities
than is actually the case. Failure to be completely honest can easily hurt
someone's chances of becoming an effective contributor. And it may even
jeopardize the person's career. No manager has the right to do that. And if the
manager can't get up the nerve or confidence to talk straight about this, that
manager shouldn't remain a manager-because that person isn't.36
. . ·.
Bias
Leniency
Severity
Halo
Similarity
Central
tendency
Primacy
Recency
Chapter 7: Providing Performance Feedback 169
Responses to Common Appraisal Biases
The propensity to , .. Re�ponse .
.
give overly favorable ratings, • Recognize that the appraisal
even when actual should focus on employee
performance lags. development.
give overly negative ratings, • Be aware of how interpersonal
even for effective performers. needs affect perceptions of
feedback.
allow highly favorable ratings • Keep accurate records of
in one area to influence employee performance and
evaluations in other areas. review before providing feedback.
give positive ratings to those • Distinguish between evaluating
who have personal personality and performance.
characteristics similar to those
of the appraiser (e.g., race,
gender, age).
give average ratings on • Consider how the appraisal
performance items regardless affects employee motivation
of actual performance. levels.
allow first impressions to • Assign employee-specific
influence ratings. preparations for the appraisal.
• Keep accurate records of
employee performance and
review before providing
feedback.
allow most recent events to • Assign employee-specific
overly influence performance preparations for the appraisal.
evaluation. • Keep accurate records of
employee performance and
review before providing
feedback.
SOURCE: Based on M. London, Job Feedback: Giving, Seeking, and Using Feedback for
Performance Improvement. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2003.
Criticize Tactfully and Develop a Plan for Improvement. Criticism needs to be
handled with equal finesse. Successful critics must clearly state the problem
while preserving the relationship.37 Certainly, it should be done in private, with an
emphasis on behavioral corrections.38 Managers should distinguish between
personality traits, which are most often treated as unchangeable aspects of an indi
vidual, and character qualities that anyone can develop. Indeed, criticism of a spe
cific behavioral problem could be couched in terms of acquiring a certain character
�
170 SECTION 2: COMMUNICATION CHALLENGES
quality. Students may be encouraged to spell correctly and use grammar properly
by exhorting them to become more professional and show attentiveness to detail.
Thus, specific writing skills are related to two qualities (professionalism and atten
tiveness) useful in a wide variety of settings.
Employees are naturally defensive if they feel their personality is under assault.
Yet, if managers deeply ponder the matter, they will often recognize that some basic
behaviors are at the root of performance problems. Someone, for instance, might
remark, "You are a very stubborn individual:' The insightful manager comments on
a specific behavior:
During meetings you need to listen more carefully to others' ideas and
suggestions. You could look at people while they talk and even try to restate their
opinion rather than your objections. I personally appreciate the way you stand
by your convictions. This is admirable but this could be balanced with
a greater sensitivity to others . It is important to be a person of conviction, but it
is equally important to know when to use this quality. Now, let's discuss some
action steps ....
The employee still might bristle at those comments, but they accomplish
a number of objectives: they (a) focus on behavior, (b) attempt to preserve the
employee's self-esteem, and (c) set a path forward.
These are extremely delicate situations, as Buck Rodgers, who served as
a marketing director at IBM, noted:
I never thought it necessary to let others know that someone in my
department didn't do his job properly .... I entered each of these private
conversations with the assumption that both of us wanted to accomplish the
same thing: perform our job with the highest degree of excellence possible.
And, with a minimum of bruised feelings, correct our mistakes and get on
with the job.39
Notice that Rodgers links his criticism to a larger positive context. He structures
the criticism so that it's maximally informative and minimally evaluative.40
Moreover, people react differently to criticism. Employees who are confident
and have a high need for achievement react more positively. They often actively
seek negative feedback in order to improve their performance. Employees with
lower self-esteem and achievement needs may become disheartened and dis
couraged. 41 Clearly, wise leaders, like Buck Rodgers, adapt to these different
contingencies.
Finally, Use Past Performance as a Bridge to the Future. While part of the feedback
process should be dedicated to an evaluation of the past, managers ought to look
forward as well. New contingencies brought on by the inevitable changes in the
organization and the competitive environment can be discussed as a focal point
for new standards and goals. Skillful managers learn to link employees' past
Chapter 7: Providing Performance Feedback 171
accomplishments to future challenges. In the end, the employee, regardless of the
course of the appraisal, should be offered the most basic of all human needs: hope.
While at a conference in Philadelphia, I noticed a building a few blocks from my
hotel that was being torn down to make way for a new structure. A massive crane
with a huge wrecking ball pounded into the building and slowly ripped apart the
structure. For five days, this enormous crush of iron on brick went on, and still,
the small ten-story structure was only partially demolished. What a contrast to the
instantaneous destruction of much larger buildings by the careful placement of
dynamite charges at strategic points. In a matter of seconds, even a fifty-story build
ing can be toppled. Unfortunately, many managers thrash into their employees with
salvo after salvo of criticism like this massive wrecking ball. They fail to notice
employees' unique abilities and motivations, focus on personality characteristics,
and do not link past accomplishments to future challenges. The result: the problems
remain and the new structure cannot be built. A wise manager, like a demolition
expert, discerns those strategic points and quickly removes the offending behaviors,
building in the same spot a new foundation for personal and organizational growth.
CONCLUSION
An effective feedback system helps employees learn, develop, and improve.42 And it
helps the organization align people with goals, optimize organizational perfor
mance, and meet ever-changing challenges.43
Several years ago, we conducted a communication assessment in which the company
scored considerably below average on every feedback question. Upon arriving at the
company to present the results, we walked past an isolated cluster of brown, brittle, and
dying shrubbery in front of the company's office. At the time, I thought, "Wow! This is
the perfect symbol for this company's management philosophy." The company watered
and cared for those bushes about as well as they gave feedback to their employees. The
employees had no job descriptions, they had no idea how they were being evaluated,
they were never praised, and appraisal reviews had not been conducted in years. The
end results were predictable: low job satisfaction, poor motivation, uneven perfor
mance, and a host of other communication difficulties. Most companies are not in such
severe shape. But every company could pay much closer attention to its feedback sys
tem. As any horticulturist knows, this can be done only day-by-day and with the utmost
of care by cultivating employees' natural talents.
Appraiser bias
Critical incident technique
Informal feedback
Lake Wobegon phenomenon
One-minute praise
Performance standards
Self-appraisal
Task-inherent feedback
