Module 5
Employee Development
A. Personal Developmental Plans
Personal developmental plans specify courses of action to be taken to improve
performance. Achieving the goals stated in the developmental plan allows employees to
keep abreast of changes in their fields or professions. Such plans highlight an employee’s
strengths and the areas in need of development, and they provide an action plan to
improve in areas of weaknesses and further develop areas of strength. Developmental
plans can be created for every job, ranging from entry level to the executive suite. No
matter how high up the position within the organization and how simple or complex the
nature of the job in question, there is always room for improvement. Information to be
used in designing developmental plans comes from the appraisal form. Specifically, a
developmental plan can be designed based on each of the performance dimensions
evaluated. For example, if the performance dimension “communication” is rated as
substandard, this area would be targeted by the developmental plan. In addition, however,
developmental plans focus on the knowledge and skills needed for more long-term career
aspirations.
In addition to improved performance, the inclusion of development plans and, in
more general terms, the identification of employee strengths and weaknesses as part of
the performance management system have another important benefit: employees are
more likely to be satisfied with the system.2 For example, a study including 137
employees at a production equipment facility in the southern United States showed that
the greater the extent to which employees believed that the system was being used for
developmental purposes, the more satisfied they were with the system. On the other hand,
perceptions of the extent to which the system was used for evaluative purposes did not
relate to employee satisfaction with the system. In other words, using the system for
evaluative purposes did not relate to employee satisfaction with the system, but using the
system for developmental purposes had a positive relationship with satisfaction.
A good developmental plan helps employees meet performance standards. Thus, a
developmental plan includes suggested courses of action to address each of the
performance dimensions that are deficient. This is an important point given that recent
surveys have shown that about 25% of federal employees and between 11 and 16% of
private sector employees in the United States are not performing up to standards. A good
developmental plan provides tools so that employees can continue to meet and exceed
expectations regarding the current job. Thus, the plan includes suggestions about how to
continue to meet and exceed expectations for each of the performance dimensions
included in the appraisal form. A good developmental plan includes advice and courses
of action that should be taken so that employees will be able to take advantage of future
opportunities and career advancement. Specifically, a good plan indicates which new
competencies and behaviors should be learned to help with career advancement. Even if
career opportunities within the organization are not readily available, a good plan
provides employees with growth opportunities and opportunities to learn new skills.
These opportunities provide employees with intrinsic rewards and a more challenging
work experience, even if the new skills learned are not a formal part of their jobs. Such
opportunities can make jobs more attractive and serve as a powerful employee retention
tool. In addition, the new skills can be useful in case of lateral transfers within the
organization.
he inclusion of this information after performance ratings allows the manager and
employee to focus on developmental areas identified as weaknesses in the performance
review process. In this way, the developmental plans created for employees at Texas
A&M are directly related to performance dimensions important for the unit and the
overall organization. In addition, including the developmental plan at the end of the
review and after setting annual performance goals allows the employee to determine
whether there are areas he or she needs to develop in order to attain the specified goals.
Why does goal setting work? In other words, based on studies of more than 40,000
people in eight countries, why have “stretch” goals led to better performance than “do
your best” or easy goals?5 There are four basic reasons. First, when an employee
commits to a goal, he or she diverts attention away from activities that are not relevant to
the goal and toward activities that are relevant. Second, challenging goals are energizing
and lead to higher levels of effort. Third, stretch goals lead to persistence (e.g., tight
deadlines lead to a faster pace than do loose deadlines). Finally, stretch goals motivate
employees to use the knowledge they have to reach the goal or to search for new
knowledge that they may need.
What does a developmental plan look like? Plans should include a description of
specific steps to be taken and specific objectives to reach. In other words, what is the new
skill or knowledge that will be acquired and how will this occur? This includes
information on the resources and strategies that will be used to achieve the objectives.
For example, will the employee learn the skill from a coworker through on-the-job
training? Will the company reimburse the employee for expenses associated with taking
an online course? The plan’s objectives should include not only the end product, such as
the new skill to be learned, but also the completion date and how the supervisor will
know whether the new skill has indeed been acquired. For example, in the case of the
online course, the objective could state that the course will be completed by July 23,
2012, and the employee is expected to receive a grade of B+ or better. Overall, objectives
included in the developmental plans should be practical, specific, time oriented, linked to
a standard, and developed jointly by the supervisor and the employee.
An additional important feature of developmental plans is that they should keep
the needs of both the organization and the employee in mind. The choice of what specific
skills or performance areas will be improved is dictated by the needs of the organization,
especially when the organization is investing in the plan. In addition, the plan created is
dictated by the needs of the individual. The supervisor and the employee need to agree on
what development or new skills will help enrich the employee’s work experience as well
as help accomplish organizational goals now or in the near future. As an example,
consider the content of the developmental plan at Texas A&M. First, employees are
directed to a Web site that includes examples of possible developmental activities.
Overall, the Texas A&M plan includes all of the required components. There is a
description of developmental objectives, activities that will be conducted to reach these
objectives, and dates of completion. One important piece is missing, however. The plan
does not include specifics of how the accomplishment of each objective will be
measured. Specifically, how will the supervisor know if the administrative assistant has a
good working knowledge of Excel after she has completed the online course? How will
the supervisor know if the administrative assistant’s customer service skills have
improved after she has attended the workshop and has undergone on-the-job training?
The Excel training could be measured by the administrative assistant’s performance in
the course or by examining answers to questions about knowledge of Excel that faculty
and others giving Excel assignments to the administrative assistant answer in filling out
appraisal forms. Regarding customer service skills, the accomplishment of the objective
might be measured by questioning those customers served by the administrative assistant
(i.e., faculty and students).
Each employee is paired with a coworker or supervisor who designs a formal on-
the-job training course. The design of these mini-training programs includes how many
hours a day or week training will take place and specific learning objectives. Some large
organizations such as McDonald’s, Motorola, Capgemini and Ernst & Young offer in-
house courses given at their own corporate universities. Other organizations may provide
tuition reimbursement. Given the proliferation of onl Employees can read books and
study other resources on their own. Once again, it is important that an objective be set
regarding what will be read and within what time frame as well as what measure(s) will
be used to assess whether learning has taken place. Many organizations have mentoring
programs. In general terms, mentoring is a developmental process that consists of a one-
on-one relationship between a senior (mentor) and junior (protégé) employee. For such
programs to be successful, it is best to allow the mentor and protégé to choose each other
rather than arbitrarily assigning who will be mentoring whom. In general, mentors serve
as role models and teach protégés what it takes to succeed in the organization. In more
specific terms, mentors can help protégés gain targeted skills.
Another way to acquire required knowledge and skills is to sponsor an
employee’s attendance at a conference or trade show. It is useful to require that the
employee provide a written report or even deliver a presentation upon returning from the
conference. In this way, it is easier to assess what has been learned and, in addition, the
knowledge gained can be shared with other organizational members. Some organizations
provide tuition reimbursement benefits for their employees to obtain additional degrees
or certifications. For example, the organization can sponsor an employee’s MBA
program or an employee’s taking a course with the goal of earning a certification
designation (e.g., Certified Novell Administrator, Professional in Human Resources). In
most cases, employees commit to continuing the relationship with their employer for a
prespecified amount of time after completing the degree. If the employee leaves the
organization before this time frame, he may have to reimburse the organization for the
cost of his education.
Another way to gain necessary skills is to be assigned to a different job on a
temporary basis. This is the model followed in the medical profession in which residents
have to rotate across specialty areas for several months (e.g., OB-GYN, psychiatry,
pediatrics). For example, residents may be required to rotate across the various
emergency medicine services for a 19-month period. A less systematic rotation system
includes the opportunity to work on a challenging temporary assignment. This allows
employees to gain specific skills within a limited time frame. Some employers sponsor
membership in professional or trade organizations. Such an organization distributes
publications to its members and holds informal and formal meetings in which employees
have an opportunity to learn about best practices and other useful information for their
jobs.
B. Direct Supervisor’s Role and 360-Degree Feedback Systems
The direct supervisor or line manager has an important role in the creation and
completion of the employee’s developmental plan. Because of the pivotal role of the
direct supervisor in the employee development process, it is a good idea for the
supervisor to have her own development plan. This will help the supervisor understand
the process from the employee’s perspective, anticipate potential roadblocks and
defensive attitudes, and create a plan in a collaborative fashion.7 First, the supervisor
needs to explain what would be required for the employee to achieve the desired
performance level, including the steps that an employee must take to improve her
performance. This information needs to be provided together with information on the
probability of success if the employee completes the suggested steps. A good tool that
supervisors can use to accomplish this goal is to use the feedforward interview (FFI). The
goal of the FFI is to understand the types of behaviors and skills that individuals have that
allow them to perform well and to think about ways to use these same behaviors and
skills in other contexts to make further improvements in the future.
The supervisor sets the stage as follows: “All of us have both negative and
positive experiences at work. I would like to meet with you to discuss some positives
aspects only and see how we can learn from those experiences about things that work
well.” Then, the supervisor can ask, “Could you please tell me about a story about an
event or experience at work during which you felt at your best, full of life and in flow,
and you were content even before the results of your actions were known?” The second
step involves understanding the factors that led to the successful story. For example, the
supervisor can ask, “What were some of the things you did or did not do, such as your
specific personal strengths and capabilities, that made this success story possible?” and
“What were the conditions that made this success story possible?” It is important to
uncover both the personal and contextual factors that led to the success story. This step is
similar to conducting detective work to try to understand the various factors that led to
success, including the role that the work environment (e.g., technology) and others (e.g.,
customers, peers) played in the story.
The third step involves asking questions that will lead to an employee’s ability to
replicate the conditions that led to success in the past into the future. So, the supervisor
can first note that “The conditions you have just described seem to be your personal code
for reaching [insert the key achievement in the story such as happiness at work, optimal
performance, and outstanding leadership].” Then, follow up with questions such as,
“Think about your current actions, priorities, and plans for the near future (e.g., next
week, month, or quarter), and tell me how you think you may be able to replicate these
conditions to be able to achieve the same level of [insert satisfaction, achievement,
performance, etc.] as you did before.”
Results of the FFI may suggest that there may be resources that the employee
needs to achieve his or her developmental goals. Thus, as a second step in terms of a
supervisor’s role, he or she has a primary role in referring the employee to appropriate
developmental activities that can assist the employee in achieving her goals. This
includes helping the employee select a mentor, appropriate reading resources, courses,
and so forth. Third, the supervisor reviews and makes suggestions about the
developmental objectives. Specifically, the supervisor helps assure the goals are
achievable, specific, and doable. Fourth, the supervisor has primary responsibility for
checking on the employee’s progress toward achieving the developmental goals. For
example, the supervisor can remind the employee of due dates and revise goals if needed.
Finally, the supervisor needs to provide reinforcements so the employee will be
motivated to achieve the developmental goals. Reinforcements can be extrinsic and
include rewards such as bonuses and additional benefits, but reinforcements can also
include the assignment of more challenging and interesting work that takes advantage of
the new skills learned.
Supervisors themselves need to be motivated to perform functions that will
support the employees’ completion of their developmental objectives, including
conducting FFIs. For this to happen, supervisors must be rewarded for doing a good job
in helping their employees develop. Consider how this is done at KLA-Tencor
Corporation (www.kla-tencor.com), one of the world’s top 10 manufacturers of
semiconductor equipment. At KLA-Tencor, between 10 and 30% of supervisors’ bonus
pay is directly tied to employee development. Employee development is measured in
terms of employee training and certification levels. Managers are given at least quarterly
updates on the status of their staff development. In addition, employees themselves are
rewarded for engaging in developmental activities. In fact, only employees with up-to-
date training and certification levels are eligible for bonuses. Thus, employee
development is successful at KLA-Tencor because both employees and managers are
directly rewarded for employee development. After several years of implementing these
practices, employee development has become the norm and is part of the KLA-Tencor’s
culture.
The 360-degree feedback system has become a preferred tool for helping
employees, particularly those in supervisory roles, improve performance by gathering
information on their performance from different groups.11 These systems are called 360-
degree systems because information is gathered from individuals all around the
employee. Specifically, information on what performance dimensions could be improved
is gathered from superiors, peers, customers, and subordinates. This information is
usually collected anonymously to minimize rating inflation. Employees also rate
themselves on the various performance dimensions and compare self-perceptions with the
information provided by others. A gap analysis is conducted to examine the areas for
which there are large discrepancies between self-perceptions and the perceptions of
others. A 360-degree feedback system report usually includes information on dimensions
for which there is agreement that further development is needed. This information is used
to create a developmental plan as described earlier in the chapter. For example, a study
including over 2,000 managers demonstrated that the objectives included in personal
developmental plans were driven by performance dimensions that received low scores in
360-degree feedback systems.
The 360-degree feedback system is most helpful when it is used for
developmental purposes only and not for administrative purposes.13 This is because
people are more likely to be honest if they know the information will be used to help the
individual improve and not to punish or to reward him or her. However, it is possible to
implement such systems successfully for administrative purposes after they have been in
place for some time—usually two years or so.14 The 360-degree feedback system is
usually implemented for individuals who have supervisory roles, but these systems can
be used for all positions within the organization. Many organizations take advantage of
technology to minimize the amount of paperwork and time involved in collecting such
data. The Internet is becoming a pervasive medium by which to administer 360-degree
feedback systems. The service provider, usually an outside consulting firm, sends an e-
mail message with instructions and time frames for assessment to each employee to be
rated. Then, employees can access a secure Web site and, after entering their personal
IDs and passwords, create individual lists of raters who will be asked to provide feedback
about their performance. To make things easier, the employee can even select names
from a drop-down menu that includes company managers and employees. Allowing
employees to select the raters who will provide information on their performance is likely
to increase acceptance of the results.15 The raters selected are asked to visit the Web site
and to provide performance feedback within a certain time period. After the data have
been collected electronically, it is fairly easy to compile the results and e-mail a report to
the employee who has been evaluated.
Some Internet-based systems also provide online training for raters on how to
complete the feedback forms in helpful and constructive ways. Some systems even
include features that allow for the detection of rating errors. For example, a window may
pop up if a rater gives the maximum score to an employee on all dimensions. Raters may
even see a graph on the screen that shows the extent to which the ratings they have
provided agree with the ratings provided by other people rating the same employee. Some
systems even include an online virtual feedback coach to help create developmental
plans. The final plan, however, must be consensually decided upon in a meeting between
the employee and his supervisor. Unless the developmental plan has an employee’s
complete acceptance, it is likely to become another inconsequential HR-mandated task.
Feedback reports can include graphs showing the areas in which employees’ perceptions
differ the most from the perceptions of other raters. They can also show average scores
across sources of information so that the areas that need improvement are readily
identified. The resulting report can be e-mailed automatically to the employee and his
supervisor so that both have an opportunity to review the results before meeting to create
a developmental plan.
A trend adopted by software companies that offer Internet-based 360-degree
systems is to offer a bundle of systems including 360-degree feedback together with
learning management, compensation, and even recruiting and succession planning. These
integrative applications, usually called “talent management” systems, allow organizations
to manage data about employees in a systematic and coordinated way.17 Such integrative
software applications allow organizations to create an inventory of their human capital
and better understand their strengths and weaknesses at the organizational level. For
example, an organization that uses such applications is quickly able to deploy project
teams with the appropriate mix of skills and experience after doing a quick search in the
database. Another important advantage of these integrative applications is that
performance management can be more easily linked to recruiting, compensation, training,
and succession planning. In other words, the system can keep track of an employee’s
developmental needs and how these needs have been addressed (e.g., via training) over
time. Table 8.3 includes a nonexhaustive list of vendors that offer Internet-based 360-
degree feedback systems and a brief description of their products. This table also includes
information on whether a demonstration of it is available online.
The CheckPoint system includes self-evaluations as well as evaluations provided
by the direct supervisor, direct subordinates, and peers. After performance information
has been collected from all these sources, the evaluated manager receives feedback in the
form of the graph shown in Figure 8.2. This graph illustrates the discrepancies between
self- and others’ ratings as well as the scores obtained for each competency. For example,
this graph shows that this particular manager has the greatest gap for the competency
“development of others.” Specifically, the manager assigned a score of about 4.5 to
herself, whereas the average score provided by her direct supervisor, direct subordinates,
and peers is only 2.55.
In this particular illustration, the manager believes that she displays behaviors
indicating the competency “development of others” somewhere between “usually” and
“always.” By contrast, her boss, employees, and peers believe that she demonstrates these
behaviors somewhere between “seldom” and “sometimes.” In other words, the self-rating
falls within the favorable zone whereas the ratings provided by others do not. To explore
this gap further, the report provided to the manager also includes more detailed
information on the scores provided by each source of information. The Reference Group
Comparison chart included in Figure 8.3 shows this information. An examination of the
scores provided for the competency “development of others” indicates that all sources,
except for the manager herself, agree that work is needed regarding this competency
because all scores are between the “seldom” and “sometimes” categories. By contrast, the
manager believes she is doing an exceptional job of cultivating individual talent (score of
5) and motivating successfully (score of 4).
It is not sufficient, however, just to provide scores regarding each of the
competencies. Becoming aware that there is a problem with a competency is a very good
first step, but a good 360-degree feedback system also provides concrete suggestions
about what to do to improve competencies.18 The CheckPoint system does this by
providing what is called a development summary. The development summary describes
strengths and areas that should be developed further. An example of this is shown in
Figure 8.4. According to the graph, this particular manager has several strengths but also
some areas that deserve further development. For example, there is a need to work on the
“facilitates team success” dimension of the competency “relationships.” The report also
includes specific suggestions on how to improve this competency that are shown in
Figure 8.5. Specifically, the manager is given tips and advice regarding concrete steps to
be taken to improve performance. For example, in terms of learning to collaborate on
team decisions, the manager is given advice about how to compromise and reach win-win
decisions and how to gain support for decisions.
360-degree feedback systems are not necessarily beneficial for all individuals and
organizations. For example, individuals who are high on self-efficacy (i.e., they believe
they can perform any task) are more likely to improve their performance based on
feedback received from peers compared to individuals low on self-efficacy.19 Also, the
effect of receiving feedback from multiple sources is most beneficial for individuals who
perceive there is a need to change their behavior, react positively to feedback, believe
change is feasible, set appropriate goals to improve their performance, and take concrete
actions that lead to performance improvement.20 On the other hand, individuals who
score lower on self-efficacy pay more attention to the feedback received from their line
managers. In other words, an employee’s confidence in her own performance influences
which sources of feedback are most useful to her.
In terms of organizational characteristics, 360-degree systems work best in
organizations that have cultures that support open and honest feedback. Also, these
systems work best in organizations that have a participatory, as opposed to authoritarian,
leadership style in which giving and receiving feedback is the norm and is regarded as
valuable. For example, consider the case of the Patent Office of the United Kingdom.
This organization is characterized by a hierarchical structure typical of many civil service
organizations as opposed to a flat structure where employees are involved and teamwork
is the norm. The implementation of a 360-degree feedback system did not lead to the
anticipated positive results, and there was a mismatch of expectations between what the
board members wanted (i.e., better working relations and a culture change) and what the
employees wanted (i.e., individual improvement). Moreover, managers did not show a
good understanding of the behaviors they were expected to display, and their
performance did not show improvement. Overall, the 360-degree feedback system was
not sufficiently linked to other HR systems and policies.
Organizations and individuals can gain several advantages as a consequence of
implementing a 360-degree feedback system. Because these systems include information
from more than one source, there is a decreased possibility of biases in the identification
of employees’ weaknesses. Employees become very aware of others’ expectations about
their performance. This includes not only the supervisor’s expectations but also the
expectations of other managers, coworkers, subordinates, and customers. Employees
become aware of what others think about their performance, which increases their
commitment to improve because information about performance is no longer a private
matter. Employees’ distorted views of their own performance are likely to change as a
result of the feedback received from other sources. In other words, it is difficult to
continue to have distorted views of one’s own performance in the presence of
overwhelming evidence that these perceptions may not be correct. Although receiving
information about one’s performance is not sufficient cause to improve, it is certainly a
very important step. Thus, having information on one’s performance, if paired with a
good developmental plan, is likely to lead to performance improvement. 360-degree
feedback systems provide an excellent opportunity to coworkers, superiors, and
subordinates to give information about performance in an anonymous and nonthreatening
way. Many supervisors may feel uncomfortable about providing negative feedback, but a
360-degree system makes providing such feedback easier. By receiving detailed and
constructive feedback on weaknesses and strengths in various areas, employees can gain
a realistic assessment of where they should go with their careers.
We have discussed the many advantages of 360-degree feedback systems, but we
should also consider that there are some risks involved.24 For example, negative
feedback can hurt an employee’s feelings, particularly if those giving the feedback do not
offer their comments in a constructive way. Second, the system is likely to lead to
positive results only if individuals feel comfortable with the system and believe they will
be rated honestly and treated fairly. User acceptance is an important determinant of the
system’s success. Third, when very few raters are providing the information, say, two or
three, it may be easy for the employee being rated to identify who the raters are. When
anonymity is compromised, raters are more likely to distort the information they provide.
Fourth, raters may become overloaded with forms to fill out because they need to provide
information on so many individuals (peers, superiors, and subordinates). Finally,
implementing a 360-degree feedback system should not be a one-time-only event. The
system should be in place and data collected over time on an ongoing basis. The
implementation of ongoing 360-degree feedback systems is sometimes labeled a 720-
degree feedback system, referring to the fact that the collection of 360-degree data takes
place at least twice. In short, administering the system only once will not be as beneficial
as administering the system repeatedly.
The risks associated with implementing a 360-degree system can be illustrated by
Watson Wyatt’s 2001 Human Capital Index (HCI).25 This is an ongoing study of the
effects of HR practices on the stock value of more than 700 publicly traded companies.
One particular result was especially alarming. Of the companies surveyed, those that had
implemented 360-degree feedback had lower stock value! Specifically, the companies
that used peer reviews had 4.9% lower market value than did similar companies that did
not implement peer reviews. Furthermore, companies that implemented upward feedback,
where employees rated managers, had a 5.7% lower stock value than did similar
companies that did not implement upward feedback. Does this necessarily mean that
implementing 360-degree feedback systems causes the stock price to decrease? Based on
the data collected, there is no definitive answer to this question. It could be that
organizations that are not performing well financially decide to implement 360-degree
feedback systems precisely to help improve their performance. Nevertheless, these results
highlight the importance of following best practices in implementing 360-degree
feedback systems in order to avoid any negative consequences of implementing such a
system.
Fortunately, there are several things that can be done to maximize the chance that
the system will work properly. 360-degree feedback systems are always work in progress
—subject to vulnerabilities, requiring sensitivity to hidden conflicts as much as to
tangible results, but nevertheless responsive to thoughtful design and purposeful change.
Companies that have success with these programs tend to be open to learning and willing
to experiment. In good systems, feedback is anonymous and confidential. When such is
the case, raters are more likely to provide honest information regarding performance,
particularly when subordinates are providing information about superiors. are providing
information about superiors. • Observation of employee performance. Only those with
good knowledge and firsthand experience with the person being rated should participate
in the process. There is no point in asking for performance feedback from people who are
not able to observe performance. Good systems allow the person being rated to discuss
the feedback received with a person interested in the employee’s development. In most
cases, feedback is discussed with the direct supervisor. In other cases, the discussion can
involve a representative of the HR department or a superior to whom the person does not
report directly. The information gathered has little value if there is no follow-up action.
Once feedback is received, it is essential that a developmental plan is created right away.
When 360-degree feedback systems are used for administrative purposes such as
promotions and compensation, raters are likely to distort the information provided. Make
it clear that the purpose of the system is developmental and developmental only. Initially,
the information collected should not be used for making reward allocations or any other
administrative decisions. However, the system may be used for administrative purposes
after it has been in place for some time—approximately two years or so. Survey fatigue
can be avoided if individuals are not asked to rate too many employees at the same time.
For example, data collection can be staggered so that not all surveys are distributed at the
same time. Although systems can include feedback on both behaviors (competencies) and
results, it is better to emphasize behaviors. Focusing on behaviors can lead to the
identification of concrete actions that the person being rated can take to improve
performance. In addition to providing scores on the various dimensions, raters should
provide written descriptive feedback that gives detailed and constructive comments on
how to improve performance. It is helpful if this information also includes specific
examples that help support the ratings and recommendations provided. As in the case of
providing evaluations for administrative purposes, raters should be trained. Mainly, this
includes skills to discriminate good from poor performance and how to provide feedback
in a constructive manner.
C. Coaching
Coaching is a collaborative, ongoing process in which the manager interacts with
his or her employees and takes an active role and interest in their performance.3 In
general, coaching involves directing, motivating, and rewarding employee behavior.
Coaching is a day-to-day function that involves observing performance, complimenting
good work, and helping to correct and improve any performance that does not meet
expectations and standards. Coaching is also concerned with long-term performance and
involves ensuring that the developmental plan is being achieved. Being a coach thus is
similar to serving as a consultant and, for coaching to be successful, a coach must
establish a helping relationship.4 Establishing this helping and trusting relationship is
particularly important when the supervisor and subordinate do not share similar cultural
backgrounds, as is often the case with expatriates or when implementing global
performance management systems.5 In such situations, a helping and trusting relationship
allows for what is labeled cultural transvergence in performance management, which
means that cultural differences are discussed openly, and alternate practices, which
enhance individual and team performance, are implemented.
For coaching to work, it is imperative that the relationship between the coach and
the employee be trusting and collaborative. As noted by Farr and Jacobs, the “collective
trust” of all stakeholders in the process is necessary.8 To achieve this type of relationship,
first the coach must listen in order to understand. In other words, the coach needs to try to
walk in the employee’s shoes and view the job and organization from his or her
perspective. Second, the coach needs to search for positive aspects of the employee
because this is likely to lead to a better understanding and acceptance of the employee.
Third, the coach needs to understand that coaching is not something done to the
employee but done with the employee. Overall, the manager needs to coach with
empathy and compassion. Such compassionate coaching will help develop a good
relationship with the employee. In addition, there is an important personal benefit for the
coach. This type of compassionate coaching has the potential to serve as an antidote to
the chronic stress experienced by many managers.9 It has been argued that this type of
coaching can ameliorate stress because the experience of compassion elicits responses
within the human body that arouse the parasympathetic nervous system (PSNS), which
can help mitigate stress.
The coach must understand that the employee is the source of change and self-
growth. After all, the purpose of coaching is to change employee behavior and set a
direction for what the employee will do differently in the future.10 This type of change
will not happen if the employee is not in the driver’s seat. Accordingly, the coach needs
to facilitate the employee’s setting the agenda, goals, and direction. The coach must
understand that each employee is a unique individual with several job-related and job-
unrelated identities (e.g., computer network specialist, father, skier) and a unique
personal history. The coach must try to create a whole, complete, and rich picture of the
employee. It will be beneficial if the coach has knowledge of the employee’s life and can
help the employee connect his life and work experiences in meaningful ways. The
coach’s main role is one of facilitation. A coach must direct the process and help with the
content (e.g., of a developmental plan) but not take control of these issues. The coach
needs to maintain an attitude of exploration; help expand the employee’s awareness of
strengths, resources, and challenges; and facilitate goal setting.
In more specific terms, coaching involves the following functions. Giving advice
to help employees improve their performance. In other words, coaching involves not only
describing what needs to be done but also how things need to be done. Coaching is
concerned with both results and behaviors. Providing employees with guidance so that
employees can develop their skills and knowledge appropriately. Coaching involves
providing information both about the skills and knowledge that are required to do the
work correctly and information about how the employee can acquire these skills and
knowledge. Providing employees support and being there only when the manager is
needed. Coaching involves being there when the employee needs help, but it also
involves not monitoring and controlling an employee’s every move. In the end, coaching
is about facilitation. The responsibility for improving performance ultimately rests on the
shoulders of the employee. Giving employees confidence that will enable them to
enhance their performance continuously and to increase their sense of responsibility for
managing their own performance. Coaching involves giving positive feedback that allows
employees to feel confident about what they do, but it also involves giving feedback on
things that can be improved. Helping employees gain greater competence by guiding
them toward acquiring more knowledge and sharpening the skills that can prepare them
for more complex tasks and higher-level positions. Coaching involves a consideration of
both short-term and long-term objectives, including how the employee can benefit from
acquiring new skills and knowledge that could be useful in future positions and in novel
tasks.
Based on this list of the various functions of coaching, it is evident that coaching
requires a lot of effort from the managers. For example, consider the case of NCCI
Holdings, Inc., a company based in Boca Raton, Florida, that manages the largest
database of workers’ compensation insurance information in the United States
(www.ncci.com). NCCI analyzes industry trends, prepares workers’ compensation
insurance rate recommendations, assists in pricing proposed legislation, and provides a
variety of data products to maintain a healthy workers’ compensation system and reduce
the frequency of employee injuries. At NCCI Holdings, supervisors undergo extensive
coaching training, including learning how to listen and how to be empathic. Managers
also attend monthly roundtables where they can learn from one other’s coaching
experiences. At these roundtables, managers can solicit feedback from other managers
regarding their own coaching performance.
Not all coaches perform all the coaching functions by engaging in all of the
behaviors described here. Managers who do so, of course, are highly effective. In fact,
some have become legendary leaders. Consider Table 9.1, which summarizes the critical
functions served by coaching and the behaviors coaches used to perform these functions.
For example, take the case of Jack Welch who was extremely dedicated to developing his
employees by engaging in several of the coaching behaviors described here when he was
CEO of General Electric (GE).14 To get involved with his employees, Welch spoke
during a class held at a three-week developmental course for GE’s high-potential
managers. Over the course of his career, he attended more than 750 of these classes,
engaging over 15,000 GE managers and executives. During these presentations, he
expected to answer hard questions, and he communicated honestly and candidly with his
employees. After the class, he invited all the participants to talk with him after the course.
In addition to attending these sessions, he held meetings with his top 500 executives
every January. Although Welch did not engage in formal coaching, he used the
opportunities to communicate his expectations and receive feedback from the various
business groups at GE.
Welch also conducted formal performance reviews in which he engaged in
several of the behaviors included in Table 9.1, including establishing developmental
objectives, motivating employees, documenting performance, giving feedback, and
diagnosing performance problems. He set performance targets and monitored them
throughout the year. Each year the operating heads of GE’s 12 businesses received
individual two-page, handwritten notes about their performance. Welch attached the
previous year’s comments to the new reviews with comments in the margin about the
progress made by the individual managers toward his goal or the work that he still needed
to do to reach the goal. Then, he distributed bonuses and reiterated the goals for the
upcoming year. This process cascaded throughout the organization, as other operating
heads engaged in the same performance review discussions with their subordinates.
Another example of Welch’s coaching behaviors occurred after he had heard
customer complaints about a specific product. Welch charged the manager of the division
with improving the productivity of that product fourfold. The manager sent Welch
detailed weekly reports over the course of the next four years. Welch would send the
reports back every three or four weeks with comments congratulating successes or
pointing out areas in which the manager needed to improve. The manager stated that the
fact that the CEO took the time to read his reports each week and send back comments
motivated him to reach the lofty goal that Welch had set for him. In addition to this, Jack
Welch took the time to recognize hourly workers and managers who impressed him. For
example, after one high-ranking leader turned down a promotion and transfer because he
did not want his daughter to change schools, Welch sent him a personal note stating that
he admired the man for many reasons and that he appreciated his decision to put his
family first. The employee explained later that this incident proved that Welch cared
about him both as a person and as an employee.
In short, Jack Welch was a legendary leader who developed his employees by
setting expectations, communicating clearly, documenting and diagnosing performance,
motivating and rewarding his employees, and taking an interest in their personal
development. In fact, he engaged in virtually all the behaviors and performed most of the
coaching functions listed in Table 9.1. How does Jack Welch compare to the CEO of
your current company or to a CEO you have known or heard about? We can see that
Welch was an extremely effective coach. In general, however, how do we know whether
a manager is doing a good job of coaching her employees? From a results point of view,
we could simply measure how many of a manager’s employees go on to become
successful on their own. But, as in the case of evaluating performance in general, we
should also consider behaviors in evaluating coaching performance. Consider the good
coach questionnaire included in Table 9.2. If you are or have been in a management
position, answer the questions about yourself; otherwise, think about your current or
latest supervisor or someone you know. To how many of these questions can you answer
“yes”? To how many would you answer “no”? Overall, given your responses, what is the
evaluation of this person (yourself or someone else) as a coach from a behavioral point of
view?
A manager’s personality and behavioral preferences are more likely to influence
his or her coaching style. There are four main coaching styles: driver, persuader, amiable,
and analyzer. First, coaches can adopt a driving style in which they tell the employee
being coached what to do. Assume that the coach wants to provide guidance regarding
how to deal with a customer. In this situation, the preference for a driver is to say to the
employee, “You must talk to the customer in this way.” Such coaches are assertive, speak
quickly and often firmly, usually talk about tasks and facts, are not very expressive, and
expose a narrow range of personal feelings to others. Second, coaches can use a
persuading style in which they try to sell what they want the employee to do. Someone
who is a persuader would try to explain to the employee why it is beneficial for the
organization as well as for the employee himself to talk to a customer in a specific way.
Like drivers, persuaders are assertive, but they tend to use expansive body gestures, talk
more about people and relationships, and expose others to a broad range of personal
feelings. Third, other coaches may adopt an amiable style and want everyone to be
happy. Such coaches are likely to be more subjective than objective and direct employees
to talk to customers in a certain way because it “feels” like the right thing to do or
because the employee feels it is the right way to do it. Such coaches tend not to be very
assertive and to speak deliberately and pause often, seldom interrupt others, and make
many conditional statements. Finally, coaches may have a preference for analyzing
performance in a logical and systematic way and then follow rules and procedures when
providing a recommendation. To use the same example, such analyzer coaches may tell
employees to talk to a customer in a specific way “because this is what the manual says.”
Analyzers, then, are not very assertive but, like drivers, are likely to talk about tasks and
facts rather than personal feelings.
Which of these four styles is best? Are drivers, persuaders, amiable coaches, or
analyzers most effective? The answer is that no style is necessarily superior to the others.
Good coaching should be seen as a learning opportunity and as an opportunity to set clear
goals and delegate action. Coaching involves sometimes providing direction, sometimes
persuading employees how to do things a certain way, sometimes showing empathy and
creating positive effects, and sometimes paying close attention to established rules and
procedures. One thing is for sure, however: an exclusive emphasis on one of these four
styles is not likely to help employees develop and grow. Ineffective coaches stick to one
style only and cannot adapt to use any of the other styles. On the other hand, adaptive
coaches who are able to adjust their style according to an employee’s needs are most
effective. In fact, 56% of participants in a survey of employees who had a coach at work
reported that coaching was not helping them because there was a mismatch between
coaching style and employee need.15 In sum, a combination of styles is needed.
D. Coaching Process
The first step involves setting developmental goals. As discussed in Chapter 8,
these developmental goals are a key component of the developmental plan. These goals
must be reasonable, attainable, and derived from a careful analysis of the areas in which
an employee needs to improve. In addition, goals should take into account both short- and
long-term career objectives. The second step in the coaching process is to identify
resources and strategies that will help the employee achieve the developmental goals. As
discussed in Chapter 8, these can include on-the-job training, attending courses, self-
guided reading, mentoring, attending a conference, getting a degree, job rotation, a
temporary assignment, and membership or a leadership role in a professional or trade
organization. The third step involves implementing the strategies that will allow the
employee to achieve the developmental goals. For example, the employee may begin her
job rotation plan or take a course online. The next step in the process is to collect and
evaluate data to assess the extent to which each of the developmental goals has been
achieved. Finally, the coach provides feedback to the employee, and, based on the extent
to which each of the goals has been achieved, the developmental goals are revised, and
the entire process begins again.
Managers may make similar errors in observing and evaluating behaviors related
to developmental goals. For example, a manager might make a halo error by assuming
that if an employee does a good job at working toward one developmental goal (e.g.,
improving her typing skills), she is also doing a good job at working toward a different
developmental goal (e.g., improving customer service). As is the case for performance in
general, it is important to observe and document behaviors specifically related to
developmental activities. Documentation can include memos, letters, e-mail messages,
handwritten notes, comments, observations, descriptions, and evaluations provided by
colleagues. The discussion presented in this section complements information given in
previous chapters because, although it is specifically related to behaviors regarding
developmental activities, it can be easily generalized to behaviors related to performance
in general. In other words, the following discussion applies to the observation of all
performance behaviors, not just those displayed while working toward achieving
developmental goals.
Observing an employee’s progress in achieving developmental goals is not as
easy as it may seem. Consider the following constraints that managers might experience
in attempting to observe an employee’s performance regarding developmental activities.
Managers may be too busy to gather and document information about an employee’s
progress toward his developmental goals. Consequently, too much time may elapse
between the assignment of the activity and the manager’s checking on the employee’s
progress. Managers are often unable to observe employees as they engage in
developmental activities and therefore may not have firsthand knowledge about their
performance. For example, managers do not observe the extent to which an employee
enrolled in an online course is an active participant and contributor or is a passive learner.
When the developmental activity is highly unstructured, such as an employee’s reading a
book, the manager may have to wait until the activity is completed to assess whether the
activity has been beneficial.
How can we address these constraints and make sure that a manager will be able
to observe and evaluate an employee’s performance regarding developmental activities?
The recommendations provided in Chapter 7 regarding the observation and evaluation of
performance in general apply here as well. Specifically, a good communication plan
should explain the benefits of implementing a developmental plan effectively. This helps
managers accept the plan. Also, managers should be trained so that they minimize errors
(i.e., rater error training), share notions of what it means to complete developmental
activities successfully (i.e., frame-of-reference training), observe performance accurately
(i.e., behavioral observation training), and are confident and comfortable in managing
employees’ developmental activities (i.e., self-leadership training). Finally, we need to
understand the forces that motivate managers to invest time and effort or not in the
development of their employees. In other words, what does the manager gain if her
employee’s developmental activities are supervised appropriately?
Observing and evaluating developmental activities, and performance in general, is
a complex cognitive task. Thus, documentation helps prevent memory-related errors.
When documentation exists to support evaluations, there is no mystery regarding the
outcomes. This, in turn, promotes trust and acceptance of decisions based on the
evaluation provided. Documenting developmental activities and their outcomes enables
discussion about specific facts instead of assumptions and hearsay. A careful examination
of these facts permits better planning of developmental activities for the future. Specific
laws prohibit discrimination against members of various classes (e.g., sex or religion) in
how developmental activities are allocated. For example, it is prohibited to provide male
employees with better developmental opportunities than female employees. In addition,
some court rulings have determined that employees working under contract may
challenge a dismissal. Thus, keeping accurate records of what developmental activities
employees have completed and with what degree of success as well as performance in
general provides a good line of defense in case of litigation based on discrimination or
wrongful termination.
The importance of keeping thorough performance documentation and taking
actions consistent with this documentation is illustrated by the outcome of several cases.
In one such case, John E. Cleverly, an employee at Western Electric Co., was discharged
after 14 years of good service.18 Western Electric was found guilty of age
discrimination, and Cleverly was awarded back pay because the documentation indicated
that Cleverly had been given adequate performance ratings and increases to his salary
over a course of 14 years. Upon his discharge, six months before his pension vested,
Cleverly was informed that one reason for his discharge was to make room for younger
employees. As illustrated by this case, documentation of performance should be taken
seriously. In this case, the documentation available indicated the employee had a valid
claim. In other cases, documentation could be used to discount charges of discrimination.
If Cleverly had alleged age discrimination, but the company could show that his
performance was deteriorating over time, then the company would have won the case.
Giving feedback to an employee regarding her progress toward achieving her
goals is a key component of the coaching process.21 Feedback is information about past
behavior that is given with the goal of improving future performance. Although “back” is
part of feedback, giving feedback has both a past and a future component. This is why,
when done properly, feedback can be relabeled feed forward.22 Feedback includes
information about both positive and negative aspects of job performance and lets
employees know how well they are doing with respect to meeting the established
standards.23 For example, the so-called 2+2 performance appraisal model for teachers
includes peer teachers who observe each other perform in the classroom and then offer
two compliments and two suggestions for improvement.24 Feedback is important in the
context of performance regarding development activities and goals. Our discussion of
feedback, however, goes beyond that and includes feedback about performance in
general.
Unfortunately, however, the mere presence of feedback, even if it is delivered
correctly, does not necessarily mean that all of these purposes will be fulfilled. For
example, a review of 131 studies that examined the effects of feedback on performance
concluded that 38% of the feedback programs reviewed had a negative effect on
performance.26 In other words, in many cases, the implementation of feedback led to
lower performance levels. This can happen when, for example, feedback does not include
useful information or is not delivered in the right way. For example, feedback can have
detrimental effects if it focuses on the employee as a whole as opposed to specific
behaviors at work. This is precisely the case of a very successful woman who made many
personal sacrifices such as not starting a family to reach the top echelons of the
organizational hierarchy.27 She received feedback that included information that she had
failed to retain a valued client. The feedback was accurate and delivered in the correct
manner; however, after receiving the feedback, she began to question her life choices in
general instead of focusing on how to retain valued clients in the future. In this example,
feedback was not instrumental in improving performance; instead, the feedback created
self-doubt and questions about identity.
Feedback should first focus on describing behaviors and results rather than on
evaluating and judging behaviors and results. It is better first to report what has been
observed and, once there is agreement about what happened, to evaluate what has been
observed. If evaluation takes place first, employees may become defensive and reject the
feedback. Feedback should describe performance as a continuum, going from less to
more in the case of good performance and from more to less in the case of poor
performance. In other words, feedback should include information on how to display
good performance behaviors more often and poor performance behaviors less often.
Thus, performance is a matter of degree, and even the worst performer is likely to show
nuggets of good performance that can be described as a starting point for a discussion on
how to improve performance. Feedback should include contextual information that
allows the employee to understand the importance and consequences of the behaviors and
results in question. For example, if an employee became frustrated and behaved
inappropriately with an angry customer and the customer’s complaint was not addressed
satisfactorily, feedback should explain the impact of these behaviors (e.g., behaving
inappropriately) and results for the organization (e.g., the customer’s problem was not
resolved, the customer was upset, the customer was not likely to give repeat business to
the organization).
Good feedback includes a statement that the manager has confidence that the
employee will be able to improve her performance. It is important for the employee to
hear this from the manager. This reinforces the idea that feedback is about performance
and not the performer. Note, however, that this should be done only if the manager
indeed believes the employee can improve her performance. In the case of a chronic poor
performance, this type of information could be used out of context later if the employee is
fired. Feedback can include advice given by the supervisor about how to improve
performance. In addition, however, the employee should play an active role in generating
ideas about how to improve performance in the future.
Many of the above-mentioned recommendations are particularly useful when
feedback is given to employees who score low on a personality trait labeled core self-
evaluation, which is a combination of four traits: self-esteem (i.e., the degree to which an
individual holds a favorable attitude toward himself), self-efficacy (i.e., the degree to
which an individual believes he is capable of taking action and taking control over
events), emotional stability (i.e., the degree to which an individual is not insecure, guilty,
or timid), and locus of control (i.e., the degree to which an individual believes he can
control events and outcomes in his live). Individuals with low core self-evaluations feel
they are less able to deal with the world and, consequently, are overall less satisfied with
their jobs and lives. Thus, supervisors need to be aware that feedback is likely to be
received by individuals with low versus high core self-evaluations.30 For example, low
core self-evaluation employees may feel hurt and helpless after receiving negative
feedback. Thus, the recommendations about “confidence in the employee” are
particularly relevant. Similarly, the recommendations about “advice and idea generation”
are also particularly helpful so that there is a clear course of action—rather than feelings
of helplessness and lack of direction.
Good feedback includes information about both good and poor performance.
Although most people are a lot more comfortable giving feedback on good performance
than they are on poor performance, some guidelines must be followed when giving praise
so that the feedback is useful in terms of future performance. First, praise should be
sincere and given only when it is deserved. If praise is given repeatedly and when it is not
deserved, employees are not able to see when a change in direction may be needed.31
Second, praise should be about specific behaviors or results and be given within context
so that employees know what they need to repeat in the future. For example, a manager
can say the following:32 “John, thanks for providing such excellent service to our client.
Your efforts helped us renew our contract with them for another two years. It’s these
types of behaviors and results that our group needs to achieve our goal for this year. And,
this is exactly what our company is all about: providing outstanding customer service.”
Third, in giving praise, managers should take their time and act pleased, rather than rush
through the information looking embarrassed. Finally, avoid giving praise by referring to
the absence of the negative, for example, “not bad” or “better than last time.” Instead,
praise should emphasize the positives and be phrased, for example, as “I like the way you
did that” or “I admire how you did that.”
Negative feedback includes information that performance has fallen short of
accepted standards. The goal of providing negative feedback is to help employees
improve their performance in the future; it is not to punish, embarrass, or chastise them. It
is important to give negative feedback when it is warranted because the consequences of
not doing so can be detrimental for the organization as a whole. For example, Francie
Dalton, president of Dalton Alliances, Inc., noted, “In organizations where management
imposes no consequences for poor performance, high achievers will leave because they
don’t want to be where mediocrity is tolerated. But mediocre performers will remain
because they know they’re safe. The entire organizational culture, along with its
reputation in the marketplace, can be affected by poor performers.”
Managers may fear that employees will react negatively. Negative reactions can
include being defensive and even becoming angry at the information received. In
addition, managers may fear that the working relationship, or even friendship, with their
subordinates may be affected adversely and that giving negative feedback can introduce
elements of mistrust and annoyance. Managers themselves may have received negative
feedback at some point in their careers and have experienced firsthand how feelings can
be hurt. Receiving negative feedback can be painful and upsetting, and managers may not
want to put their subordinates in such a situation. Managers may be reluctant to play the
role of an all-knowing, judgmental god. They may feel that giving negative feedback puts
them in that position.
What happens when managers avoid giving negative feedback and employees
avoid seeking it? A feedback gap results, in which managers and employees mutually
instigate and reinforce lack of communication which creates a vacuum of meaningful
exchanges about poor performance.35 A typical consequence of a feedback gap is that, in
the absence of information to the contrary, the manager gives the employee the message
that performance is adequate. When performance problems exist, they are likely to
become more intense over time. For example, clients may be so dissatisfied with the
service they are receiving that they may eventually choose to close their accounts and
work instead with the competition. At that time, it becomes impossible for the manager to
overlook the performance problem, and she has no choice but to deliverthe negative
feedback. At this stage of the process, however, feedback is delivered too late and often
in a punitive fashion. Of course, feedback delivered so late in the process and in a
punitive fashion is not likely to be helpful.
Alternatively, negative feedback is most useful when early coaching has been
instrumental in identifying warning signs and the performance problem is still
manageable. Negative feedback is also useful when it clarifies unwanted behaviors and
consequences and focuses on behaviors that can be changed. There is no point in
providing feedback on issues that are beyond the employee’s control because there is not
much she can do to improve the situation. In addition, employees are more likely to
respond constructively to negative feedback when the manager is perceived as being
trustworthy and making a genuine attempt to improve the employee’s performance. In
other words, the manager needs to be perceived as credible and as instrumental in
improving the employee’s performance in the future.36 Finally, negative feedback is
most likely to be accepted when it is given by a source who uses straight talk and not
subtle pressure and when it is supported by hard data. The supervisor must control her
emotions and stay calm. If managers follow these suggestions, it is more likely that
employees will benefit from negative feedback, even if employees are not particularly
open to receiving it.37 Following these suggestions leads to what has been labeled
“actionable feedback,” meaning that such feedback will allow employees to respond in
constructive ways and will lead to learning and performance improvement.
In some cases, an employee may not respond to the feedback provided and may
not make any improvements in terms of performance. In such cases, there is one
intermediate step that can be taken before the employee enters a formal disciplinary
process which involves a verbal warning, a written warning, and may lead to termination.
The employee can be given a once-in-a-career decision-making leave.41 This is a “day of
contemplation” that is paid and allows the employee to stay home and decide whether
working in this organization is what he or she really wants to do. This practice is based
on adult learning theory, which holds individuals responsible for their actions. Unlike a
formal disciplinary action, the decision-making leave does not affect employee pay. As
noted by Tim Field, principal of a consulting firm in Los Angeles, California, “This
element of holding people accountable without negatively impacting their personnel file
or payroll tends to catch people off guard, because problem employees, like problem
children, are often expecting negative attention for their bad behavior.” How can the
decision to grant an employee a decision-making leave be communicated?
Using a decision-making leave as part of the performance management system
can be a powerful tool to give problem employees an opportunity to improve their
performance. However, this tool may not lead to the desired outcomes, and the employee
may have to enter into a disciplinary process. Note that a demotion or transfer may be a
more appropriate action when there is evidence that the employee is actually trying to
overcome the performance deficiencies but is not able to do so. However, termination is
the appropriate action when performance does not improve and the employee continues
to make the same mistakes or fails to meet standards. Also, termination is the appropriate
course of action when an employee engages in serious violations of policies, laws, or
regulations such as theft, fraud, falsifying documents, and related serious offences.
E. Performance Review Meetings
Supervisors who manage employee performance often feel uncomfortable in this
role because managing performance requires that they judge and coach at the same
time.45 In other words, supervisors serve as judges by evaluating performance and
allocating rewards. In addition, supervisors serve as coaches by helping employees solve
performance problems, identify performance weaknesses, and design developmental
plans that will be instrumental in future career development. In addition, supervisors feel
uncomfortable because they feel they need to convey bad news and employees may react
negatively. In other words, there is a concern that managing performance unavoidably
leads to negative surprises. Not surprisingly, employees are usually not satisfied with
their performance reviews. For example, a survey of Australian employees conducted by
the Gallup organization found that less than 20% of employees reported that their
performance reviews helped them improve their performance. Overall, the majority of
respondents reported being dissatisfied with the level of feedback and frequency of
performance reviews from managers.
Because supervisors play these paradoxical roles, it is usually helpful to separate
the various meetings related to performance. Separating the meetings also minimizes the
possibility of negative surprises.47 Moreover, when meetings are separated, it is easier to
separate the discussion of rewards from the discussion about future career development.
This allows employees to give their full attention to each issue, one at a time. The
purpose of this meeting is to discuss how the performance management system works,
which requirements and responsibilities rest primarily on the employee, and which rest
primarily on the supervisor. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss employee
performance, including the perspectives of both the supervisor and the employee. The
purpose of this meeting is to discuss what, if any, compensation changes will result from
the employee’s performance during this period. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss
the employee’s developmental needs and what steps will be taken so that performance
will be improved during the following period.
Although six types of meetings are possible, not all six take place as separate
meetings. For example, the self-appraisal, classical performance review, merit/salary
review, developmental plan, and objective setting meetings may all take place during one
umbrella meeting labeled “performance review meeting.” As noted above, however, it is
better to separate the various types of information discussed so that the employee and
supervisor focus on each of the components separately. Note, however, that the
conversation about compensation should be related to performance (i.e., employees must
understand the direct link between performance and compensation decisions). Regardless
of the specific type of meeting, there are several steps that must be taken before the
meeting takes place. Specifically, it is useful to give at least a two-week advance notice
to the employee to inform her of the purpose of the meeting and enable her to prepare for
it. Also, it is useful to block out sufficient time for the meeting and arrange to meet in a
private location without interruptions. Taking these steps sends a clear message that the
meeting is important and that, consequently, performance management is important.
The first step includes a description of the purpose of the meeting and the topics
to be discussed. The second step includes asking the employee to summarize her
accomplishments during the review period. This is more easily accomplished when the
employee is given the appraisal form to be used by the supervisor before the meeting.
This portion of the meeting allows the employee to provide her perspective regarding
performance. The role of the supervisor is to listen to what the employee has to say and to
summarize what he hears. This is not an appropriate time for the supervisor to disagree
with what the employee says. Next, the supervisor explains the rating he provided for
each performance dimension and explains the reasons that led to each score. It is more
effective to start with a discussion of the performance dimensions for which there is
agreement between the employee’s self-appraisal and the supervisor’s appraisal. This is
likely to reduce tension and to demonstrate to the employee that there is common ground
and that the meeting is not confrontational. Also, it is better to start with a discussion of
the performance dimensions for which the scores are highest and then move on to the
dimensions for which the scores are lower. For areas for which there is disagreement
between self- and supervisor ratings, the supervisor must take great care in discussing the
reason for his rating and provide specific examples and evidence to support the score
given. At this point, there should be an effort to resolve discrepancies, and the supervisor
should take extra care with sensitive areas. The employee should be provided with the
opportunity to explain her viewpoint thoroughly. This is a very useful discussion because
it leads to clarifying performance expectations. For dimensions for which the score is
low, there should be a discussion of the possible causes for poor performance. For
example, are the reasons related to lack of knowledge, lack of motivation, or contextual
factors beyond the control of the employee?
Performance review discussions serve very important purposes. First, these
discussions allow employees to improve their performance by identifying performance
problems and solutions for overcoming them. Second, they help build a good relationship
between the supervisor and the employee because the supervisor shows that she cares
about the employee’s ongoing growth and development and that she is willing to invest
resources, including time, in helping the employee improve. Unfortunately, these
purposes are not always realized because employees may be defensive, and many
supervisors do not know how to deal with this attitude because they lack the necessary
skills to conduct an effective performance review. How can we tell when an employee is
being defensive? Typically, there are two patterns of behavior that indicate
defensiveness.49 First, employees may engage in a fight response. This includes blaming
others for performance deficiencies, staring mutely at the supervisor, and other, more
aggressive responses such as raising her voice or even pounding the desk. Second,
employees may engage in a flight response. This includes looking away, turning away,
speaking softly, continually changing the subject, or quickly agreeing with what the
supervisor is saying without basing the agreement on a thoughtful and thorough
discussion about the issues at stake. When employees have a fight-or-flight response
during the performance review discussion, it is unlikely that the meeting will lead to
improved performance in the future.
