To hear Alan Weiss tell it, the 42 marketing associates who report to him at CDW Computer Centers Inc. actually like to have their job performance reviewed.
“They absolutely look forward to sitting down and doing a goal review. They want to know, `If I accomplish my goals, what is the end result?'” said Weiss, who is director of marketing at the Vernon Hills-based computer direct marketer.
Mention the terms “performance review” or “job evaluation” at most companies and you can feel the tension rising. Mention them at CDW and you’re likely to be greeted with, “How soon?” That’s because about 80 percent of CDW’s 2,800 workers are incentive-based, meaning they share in the rewards when the company succeeds.
Most often, they receive a financial bonus, but the reward also can take the form of a company-paid family vacation or a celebration in the office. “Happy co-workers make happy customers,” said Art Friedson, vice president of co-worker services, as CDW calls its personnel department.
While companies throughout the nation are taking a new look at the way they measure–and reward–employees, CDW remains largely an exception to the rule. Far too often, experts say, the performance review process is dreaded by managers and workers alike who see it at best as a stressful exercise leading to job advancement. At worst, it can lead to termination.
Indeed, experts say, in today’s soft economy, where layoffs are commonplace, job evaluations are taking on increasing importance with many companies scrutinizing performance reviews to determine which employees they can live without.
But the process doesn’t have to be threatening. “In companies that do it well, there should be nothing to dread because there should be no surprises,” said Maureen Tarantello, strategic rewards office practice leader at Watson Wyatt Worldwide, a human resources consulting firm. She notes that an effective performance review should include a good initial planning discussion, followed by ongoing feedback during the year and then the annual review, which should summarize what the worker and his manager already know.
On the flip side, a lack of clear goals is one of the biggest problems with job evaluations today, says Jack Zigon, president of Philadelphia-based Zigon Performance Group. The more specific the goals are, the easier it is for workers to do the job right the first time and the easier it is for managers to assess their performance, he says.
By taking the surprise factor out of the performance review equation, job evaluations can be a positive experience, Zigon says. “If the employee has been involved in the process and can track their own work, at the end of the year when they sit down, it’s a pleasant experience. The manager becomes more of a coach or an advocate asking, `How can I help you do your job better?'”
At CDW, for example, co-workers and their supervisors work together to come up with individual goals. “By them assisting in the creation of the goals, co-workers get to buy into it. They have more of a commitment to the goal,” Weiss said.
But not everyone is lucky enough to work at a company that invites participation from the rank and file. In fact, some companies are taking the opposite approache. Some experts estimate as many as 20 percent of companies are using so-called “rank and yank” or “forced distribution” systems, where a certain percentage of workers receive “unsatisfactory” grades and are told to improve or risk losing their jobs.
While they can be effective in paring a company’s workforce, such grading systems not surprisingly produce such side effects as poor morale, less cooperation among workers and lawsuits from workers who feel they were graded unfairly, Zigon says.
Ford Motor Co., for example, tried adopting an ABC grading system two years ago, initially stipulating that 10 percent of workers had to be given Cs, or unsatisfactory grades that put workers at risk of losing their jobs. The approach backfired, resulting in a morale problem. And the company canned it after workers filed suit claiming age discrimination. Now, the company is using a pay-for-performance grading system that doesn’t stipulate how many workers should fall into each grade category. “We’ve kept the requirement that objectives be set and employees have ongoing discussions with their supervisor,” said spokeswoman Anne Marie Gattari.
Even when a company isn’t sued, a top-down approach is likely to create an “us versus them” dichotomy between workers and management that can lead to roadblocks to communication, experts say. A more effective way of handling job evaluations is to encourage employees to evaluate their own performance. While you might think this could lead to an inflated evaluation, it rarely does. “As a manager, I’ve had situations where the employees are harder on themselves than I am,” Zigon said.
Rather than threatening termination, a good performance evaluation program needs to reward top performers, but not necessarily with money. “For a lot of top performers, pay isn’t the motivating factor,” says Bob Campbell, a consultant with Hewitt Associates. “It’s opportunities for challenging work, cool assignments, access to leaders and more flexibility.”
Besides motivating workers, effective performance management can pay off in financial success for the company as a whole. New research from Watson Wyatt shows a direct correlation between a company’s financial performance and human resource management. The company compiled data from 750 companies and found that the higher the company’s Human Capital Index score (or how well it treats its workers), the higher its value.
The research also shows the most important factors contributing to a company’s bottom line are rewards and accountability and creating a collegial, flexible workplace — all elements of effective performance management, Tarantello says.
Friedson of CDW is not surprised at the correlation. “The proof is in the pudding,” he says, noting that CDW’s sales continue to grow at a time when the computer industry’s sales are down about 20 percent.
“Our co-workers just care a lot more than their counterparts at other companies. They realize they can make a difference,” he said. “It’s a very powerful force.”
So what should workers who don’t work at such enlightened companies do to ensure success in their performance review? Experts advise workers to take the initiative and make sure you and your supervisor agree about what your job is and how well you are doing it.
If your manager isn’t good about checking in with you, make a point to check in with him. If you company doesn’t use goal-tracking worksheets, make up your own.
Or, at the least, just e-mail your manager a note letting him know about your most recent accomplishments.
How to overcome a bad evaluation
What should you do if you think your review doesn’t accurately reflect your performance? Experts offer this advice:
1. Reflect on the feedback and ask clarifying questions to make sure you’re not misconstruing anything, according to Maureen Tarantello of Watson Wyatt Worldwide. “Realistically, most people are going to be upset,” she says. But it’s important not to become defensive.
2. Take time to cool off. Make notes on any accomplishments that may counter your supervisor’s concerns. Be specific in your documentation of your successes. You can gather feedback from other sources, such as colleagues and customers. Schedule a separate time to talk to your supervisor again.
3. Tarantello says that you can begin the second meeting by saying, “Some of the things you told me have been bothering me. Here’s why.” Have hard facts and examples to support what you believe to be the real picture of your performance.
4. If you still are not satisfied with your supervisor’s response, ask for another review in 90 days. And ask exactly what criteria you will be evaluated on, said Jack Zigon, president of Zigon Performance Group. And ask for as much specific feedback as possible.
Often vagueness is the core problem, Zigon says, not performance. The manager is looking for one measure of success and the worker is delivering another.
If it’s really not working, you might want to start looking for a new job. And after you’ve done your own evaluation you’ll have great accomplishments to add to your resume.
— Ann Meyer
