The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

Re: The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

Bob Russell — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 12:42:40 GMT

I have been a long-term sceptic of appraisals but as part of her ANA course one of our non-RVN 'nurses' had to put together an appraisal form. It was completed by other staff and to my great surprise generated quite a lot of interesting points especially about where staff felt their responsibilities started and finished!

It turned out to be quite a useful exercise. We just need to implement the changes required!

Re: The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

Jo Cobbett — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 11:59:04 GMT

I remember being very disappointed by my first appraisal. I went into it thinking "great, I'll get some feedback and find out how I can improve myself", but it mostly consisted of "how do you think you're getting on?", and "we're very happy with you". I was looking forward to some constructive criticism and didn't really get any!

Re: The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

Rachael Winder — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 17:00:23 GMT

My current job is the first practice I have worked in that performs appraisals. Appraisors are sent on a proper training course and they are structured. The practice is large and multisite so many staff never actually see their bosses that often in person, so although internal email/memos etc are used routinely for day-to-day stuff, the appraisal system along with other structured reviews/meetings does have its place. Although I fully agree that done badly they are pointless and time-consuming, done properly I think they are useful. I find it interesting that my current practice has better staff retention and morale than all my other jobs combined. I'm not naive enough to think appraisals are the be all and end all, but for many staff they are one of few chances to have a confidential private discussion. Depends on what works for an individual practice.

Re: The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

John Flynn — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 12:21:38 GMT

Hi all,

I don't think I'll have the time to address all the points raised individually and share my own personal viewpoints on them (and doubt my views are sufficiently interesting to air them all!), and there's a fair chance that we come at this from differing fundamental views on "business & management" and therefore are unlikely to agree, so here's my biased summary of the main arguments in favour of and against an annual performance review system:

Loads of businesses do them, so they must be a good idea.
I've heard loads of business 'experts' recommend them, so they must be a good idea.
If they're seen by appraiser / apprasiee as a waste of time and wholly unhelpful or even detrimental, then its a lack of time and training in the process or because you're using an out-dated model of appraisals - new systems are so much better.
I'm part of a scheme that requires I do them, so may as well try to do them as well as possible and throw as much time and effort at them as possible.
They will help me deal with poor performance and poor motivation in the workplace.
They will help me reward good performance and good motivation in the workplace.
They will help me remain ambivalent about average performance and average motivation in the workplace.
My experience and that of employees I've talked to unrelated to my own workplace, as well as a sizeable body of 'management research' suggests that they are often unhelpful and may even be detrimental - but I have to do something, don't I?
I need to provide a written, documented process to cover myself against legal complaints from employees with respect to aspects of employment law that I know little about and therefore fear.
Otherwise I won't know what motivates my employees - the only way to tell is to sit them down in a formal setting and ask them outright, I'm pretty sure they'll be totally honest with me and not just say what they think I want to hear.

As for alternatives, I'd suggest that trying to find a direct alternative to "annual perfomance review systems" is the wrong place to start. Although if that's the starting place, I'd try to think of why I was considering implementing such a scheme or what I was trying to achieve through running such a scheme and then think creatively about how best to reach those goals - will be different for everyone I suspect.

Given that one of the main issues is wasting time with these (and most employees hate having their time wasted also), I'd consider what things I could better be spending my time on - there's no rule saying they have to be direct replacements, but could be related if you like. Better to spend 3 days on the hiring of a suitably-motivated staff member who will fit into the role in the clinic in the first place than in trying to motivate a solely-competent employee through any means - least of all "appraisals". For existing staff, better to spend 3 days doing things that are likely to motivate them. Add up the amount of money you will spend joining the PSS scheme, the amount it costs the clinic to schedule in the appraisal system (obviously your time is expensive given the host of other demands on it, but don't forget to value your employees' contribution to filling in paperwork which I hope you will be booking time off from their regular working week to achieve rather than leaving it for them to do at home), the amount you might spend on training yourself and your employees so that the system has a fighting chance of not being resented; now take that money and let the employee spend it without justifiction on whatever piece of equipment / resource they think would be helpful to them, or put it in a pot for treating cases that come in and the staff want to help but have no funding to do so, or do anything else with it that the staff might consider more worthwhile.

I think that makes me a PSS critic

I guess these schemes just aren't for everyone.

Re: The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

Neal Palk — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 11:47:38 GMT

Of course, the (frequently absent) ongoing feedback is many times more effective than a once-a-year 'look back'. Moreover an annual process is more effective if it is a summary of things already discussed/addressed rather than a critique (good or bad) or something 11 months prior!.......

Re: The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

Mark Holmes — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 10:25:27 GMT

My appraisal was a waste of time precisely because it was promoted as a waste of time. The appraisal I performed could have been worth while - if any action had been taken on the findings. A properly conducted appraisal system is worth while... What's the alternative? A completely ad hoc system which is completly unmanaged. That doesn't generate meaningful goals and doesn't record those goals so that their achievement is missed or (arguably worse) goes unrecognised.

Re: The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

bob lehner — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:25:06 GMT

The original post from which this arose concerned an employee who felt 'lost' in that he/she didn't understand his/her expected role in the great scheme of things within the practice.

I totally agree that appraisals can be very time consuming (especially for the appraiser). However they give a rare opportunity for a confidential one-to-one between the employee and someone higher up the ladder, where any problems, grievances or aspirations can be discussed in detail.

In my experience most staff problems in practice are down to communication failures or complete misunderstandings on the part of either the employer or employee.

Anything that reduces these issues must surely be good ?

Re: The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

John Flynn — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:22:29 GMT

Hi Mark,

Your experiences sound pretty typical to me. Was the time you put into being appraised or performing the appriasals really worthwhile? I get that more effort and time and training of appraisee/appraiser can lead to better satisfaction with the process, but I think such effort/time/training can usually be put to better use:

Instead of training in how to be appraised, train in an interesting clinical topic (after all, that's what the nurses wanted)
Instead of making time and effort to meet with the new-graduate vet one-to-one in an office to discuss how they don't feel valued and are concerned that they aren't progressing, arrange for them to be booked off consults to scrub up and help with that interesting kidney removal as you need their assistance.
Instead of filling in introverted paper-work about your feelings towards your job and co-workers, ask for ideas regarding what the single thing that in that employee's opinion could be done that would have the biggest impact on improved animal welfare - but only if you're going to pay attention.

[quote user="Mark Holmes"]Look up the 360 degree review process[/quote]

Am familiar already from reading (not from being part of one).

I honestly just think these are a managerial waste of time and frequently counter-productive. Certainly forcing someone to do one as part of a bureaucratic scheme they've signed up to will become jsut another box-ticking exercise.

Re: The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

Colin Thomson — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:12:59 GMT

We do appraisals, we try to get one in a year for all our employees, we certainly don't do it just for the PSS. Its been such a long time since I've been an employee, I've no knowledge of what they look and feel like from that side of the fence ( when I was an employee I never had an appraisal). I don't think they're a waste of time. They work best IMO with a structure - some written down set of points of performance which both the management and employee have an opportunity to think about prior to the appraisal. IMO they probably are most effective if there is an issue which needs addressing - we tend to come to these more prepared, and with more positive to say about an employee's performance which we can put to them before addressing the issues where we'd like to see change.

We don't always stick to our own procedures and sometime we rush them or don't prepare for them properly ( and one of my partners is particularly against the idea of structured reviews - he like to just "have a bit of a chat"). I don't think we get much out of that, and my feeling is that neither does the employee. But as I said above, where a system of regular structured reviews if very useful is if there as issues of performance or attitude to address. The structured format allows a comprehensive overview of performance etc - so it not just the issues we want to see change on that are being discussed. Often, I feel this leads to a more open discussion of the problem than there would have been if we had a meeting just to discuss that. Finally, it means we can address the issues with the employee without the rest of the staff being aware that there's anything special going on. Its a performance review, not a meeting to discuss a problem. Getting to the root of issues and changing behaviours without an employee's workmates being aware there's an issue can be a real benefit to the morale of the employee involved.

But in my estimation many practices are probably not very well managed (our own included in some areas), and the HR is a difficult thing to do. When I did my MBA one of the real eye openers was that big companies had difficulty managing their people sometimes as much as small firms. A lightbulb moment. It wasn't that I found HR issues difficult because I was particularly bad at HR, I found them difficult because HR is hard.

So in my expericnece appraisal systems have their place, they're best with a structure, and they can work to the benefit of the business and the employee.

Re: The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

Neal Palk — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 09:07:12 GMT

As per Mark - a crap appraisal process = a crap appraisal and all the ridicule that follows it.

What is true though is that the absence of ANY sort of periodical 'review' is a slackers charter which means poor performance goes unaddressed and is difficult to take action about. Before anyone yells 'I deal with it at the time/unofficially etc etc' - Precisely! That approach is another form of 'annual appraisal' (without necessarily the 'annual'!).

There is no perfect 'form' or 'document' for staff appraisal - but what there needs to be is a periodic 'discussion' about the individual's performance at work, the 'good' and the 'needs improvement' (or whatever phraseology you like): To not do something is asking for trouble at some point. A written record - even if a hand written note of the main points is simple and easy to do and pretty much essential..........

Re: The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

Mark Holmes — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:38:39 GMT

Look up the 360 degree review process

Re: The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

Mark Holmes — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 08:05:54 GMT

Most appraisals start with the attitude they are a waste of time, often on the part if the appraisee but also on the part of the appraiser. I have even had an appraisal when the first thing that was said to me when I went in was " this is a waste if time but we have to do it for the pss". Guess what - it was a waste if time. If you start an appraisal not knowing what you want to get out of it, having little structure to it and no plan then it's little more than a chat with a title. I don't have the references with me but there are a variety of sources which provide materials, plans and questionnaires to help. Staff should be trained in the performance of them, action should be seen to be taken as a result of them. I once was asked to perform the appraisals in a practice. I put some effort and time into it. The one thing that came out of it was that the nurses were frustrated by a lack of interest and provision for nurse CPD. I provided a written report on the appraisals which outlined how this was effecting moral and how it could be addressed - it was totally ignored.

Re: The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

John Flynn — Sun, 31 Mar 2013 00:31:10 GMT

[quote user="Mark Holmes"]I think all your posts refer to badly performed appraisals and its hardly a suprise that a badly performed appraisal is a bad idea - a bit like a badly performed heart bypass. That doesn't mean a heart bypass is a bad thing, just don't expect anyone can do them. [/quote]

I think the irony is that a significant proportion (even the majority?) of performance appraisals are performed badly - that was the intended thrust of the above quotes.

There are intrinsic reasons to this, which the book chapter referred to above describes beautifully, in addition to the more 'individual competency' component. Maybe a better analogy than heart bypass would be something like elbow arthroscopy for medial coronoid disease: research fails to find a benefit, that must mean the researchers are looking at people doing it badly, or perhaps didn't recruit enough cases, or the technique needed further refining, or maybe, just maybe, because the procedure itself, like annual appraisal systems, really is flawed...

Either way, whether because of intrinsic flaws, or just because routinely performed badly on a widescale, I don't feel it makes a hige difference. Sure if it's the latter reason, then more training and practise and there might be an improvement, but even if this was the case would it be worthwhile?

Sources in favour of such annual performance reviews often suggest that simply they are done badly because not enough time is put into the process, or insufficient training in the process has been done - I consider this throwing good time after bad. I've read articles from 'veterinary business gurus' suggesting that 2 to 3 days a year on the part of the appraisee being dedicated to the preparation and carrying out of the process is really required. If your aim is to reward your employee, I suspect that many would find the offer of 2 to 3 days extra holiday days a perk - maybe these could be called "appraisal days" and then the term would start to have a more positive association

[quote user="Mark Holmes"] It is very difficult to generate job satisfaction without some form of feedback.[/quote]

Many staff in veterinary clinics are quite self-motivated (like most vets who want to do their cases well etc. and get inherent satisfaction out of a job well done - more likely to be motivated by going on a CPD day and then being allowed to put into practise what they learned than filling in some paperwork and sitting down to discuss it with the boss), but I agree that positive feedback is often additionally very helpful. But introducing a formal annual performance review system is unlikely to help with that. Feedback can be offered informally on a daily basis.

If staff already have job satisfaction and are motivated, then you probably only stand to lose should the process not work out as you hoped.

If you need to generate job satisfaction in demotivated staff, then I'm not personally convinced an annual performance review system is even part of the answer...

But, as I say, I'm no management guru myself and my own personal reflections may not be typical of others - just a combination of my own experiences and what I've read.

Re: The wisdom of "an annnual performance review system"

Mark Holmes — Sat, 30 Mar 2013 23:47:54 GMT

I think all your posts refer to badly performed appraisals and its hardly a suprise that a badly performed appraisal is a bad idea - a bit like a badly performed heart bypass. That doesn't mean a heart bypass is a bad thing, just don't expect anyone can do them. It is very difficult to generate job satisfaction without some form of feedback.