Can An Annual Performance Review Work? A Case Study, Success Story, and Interview

by Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.
Contact

When Suzanne Benoit, Senior Professional in Human Resources SPHR, joined Wright-Ryan Construction, Inc. as its Director of Human Resources, she learned that her employer had been using an annual performance review process that wasn’t yielding the results it wanted. With encouragement from the president, the support of other company leaders, and a strong, technically-proficient staff, she created a new process designed to improve performance, accountability, and employee engagement.

JATHAN JANOVE: What led you to conclude that the existing performance review program needed calibration?

SUZANNE BENOIT: Although it was set up for the anniversary of each employee’s hire date, the company did not perform reviews consistently. The computer program was complicated and some managers avoided it. When reviews were done, the scores did not connect well with business results. Evaluations tended to be subjective. Managers were also evaluating twice: once for a base salary review and a second time for the Incentive Compensation (IC) program. The IC review was based upon subjective company values.

JJ: What did you do about it?

SB: We took the following steps:

  1. We began by identifying eight major areas of accountability that encompassed every position in the company.
  2. Next, we revised job descriptions to link each employee’s work to the eight accountability areas. The job descriptions became less about tasks and more about results—what you do.
  3. For continuity’s sake, we kept some of the features of the existing performance review such as a 1-to-5 numerical rating system. However, we simplified the process, approaching it from the perspective of a busy manager juggling performance reviews with other time-sensitive pressures. Instead of having to complete a complex, time-consuming form, the manager simply filled out a one-page document and assigned ratings in the eight accountability areas. In addition, we provided a short comment section allowing managers to include a narrative on an employee’s strengths, weaknesses, and goals.
  4. At the urging of our president, we created a self-evaluation form that also tracked the eight accountability areas. To keep the discussion positive and avoid friction between supervisors and employees on scoring, we did not ask employees to rate themselves numerically. Instead, we asked them to assess their own performance in each accountability area by selecting one of three descriptive boxes: 1) “needs improvement;” 2) “in development and progressing;” or 3) “something I’m doing well.” In addition, we asked them to identify projects that they had worked on, their major accomplishments, and anything they wished they had done better but had learned from. We asked for feedback about their supervisors, including what qualities they appreciated, and what their supervisors or the company might do differently to help them succeed. We also asked about their desires for future growth and development.
  5. For tracking and efficiency purposes, we did away with the hire-anniversary date and went with calendar year for all employees. We added a brief mid-year review where no rating is given, but in which a face-to-face discussion occurs regarding how the employee is doing with respect to the eight accountability areas and his or her annual goals.
  6. Finally, while focusing more on end results, we blended the two annual evaluations into one in order to save management time and provide clarity for employees.

JJ: Since implementing this approach, what have you observed?

SB: There is better communication between managers and employees. There is a better understanding of core company goals, the importance of obtaining results and, subjectively, it seems that teams are working better together. Our construction systems are being used more consistently. This relates directly to one of the eight accountabilities regarding efficient work approach. We had fewer project write-downs in 2013 and fewer customer complaints. Communication within and across groups has improved and supervisors seem more clear on the behavior we need as a company to be successful.

Initially, I worried that employee self-evaluations might create adversarial relations with supervisors. Instead, it actually improved relations and produced an information gold mine. We’ve been able to use the information to improve management training and our processes and systems.

From an HR standpoint, our primary motivation for the new program wasn’t risk management. Yet the new process has created a much more consistent and reliable written record to support status-changing decisions. In addition, it has helped HR get early warnings, in turn making HR staff more effective in heading off trouble. Last, but not least, this process has reinforced that HR is a core part of the leadership team by demonstrating its value related to company success.

JJ: For executives or HR leaders who read this interview and want to experience similar change in their organizations, what do you recommend?

SB: I think most HR professionals know the components of good performance evaluations, but become frustrated by resistance. This resistance comes from the particular history of a company’s performance review system. I would advise them to go slow. Break the big task down into pieces and educate management about each piece. You can help them to see what is working, what isn’t working, and how changing things will help the company. If you move forward too fast with a system that’s technically valid but managers aren’t ready, the missteps may be too difficult to overcome. You can win managers over one step at a time and continue with a better chance of long-term success.

Suzanne Benoit, SPHR, is Director of Human Resources at Wright-Ryan Construction, Inc. and an independent consultant. You can find more of her tips on optimizing human resources strategies on her blog.

Jathan Janove is Director of Employee Engagement Solutions and the managing shareholder of the Portland office of Ogletree Deakins. On June 23, 2014 at the SHRM 2014 Annual Conference & Exposition, Jathan will be giving a presentation, “5 Steps to Make the Performance Review Work for Employers, Not Lawyers”, in which he will share additional best practices.

- See more at: http://blog.ogletreedeakins.com/can-an-annual-performance-review-work-a-case-study-success-story-and-interview/#sthash.t7XlpruC.dpuf

When Suzanne Benoit, Senior Professional in Human Resources SPHR, joined Wright-Ryan Construction, Inc. as its Director of Human Resources, she learned that her employer had been using an annual performance review process that wasn’t yielding the results it wanted. With encouragement from the president, the support of other company leaders, and a strong, technically-proficient staff, she created a new process designed to improve performance, accountability, and employee engagement.

JATHAN JANOVE: What led you to conclude that the existing performance review program needed calibration?

SUZANNE BENOIT: Although it was set up for the anniversary of each employee’s hire date, the company did not perform reviews consistently. The computer program was complicated and some managers avoided it. When reviews were done, the scores did not connect well with business results. Evaluations tended to be subjective. Managers were also evaluating twice: once for a base salary review and a second time for the Incentive Compensation (IC) program. The IC review was based upon subjective company values.

JJ: What did you do about it?

SB: We took the following steps:

  1. We began by identifying eight major areas of accountability that encompassed every position in the company.
  2. Next, we revised job descriptions to link each employee’s work to the eight accountability areas. The job descriptions became less about tasks and more about results—what you do.
  3. For continuity’s sake, we kept some of the features of the existing performance review such as a 1-to-5 numerical rating system. However, we simplified the process, approaching it from the perspective of a busy manager juggling performance reviews with other time-sensitive pressures. Instead of having to complete a complex, time-consuming form, the manager simply filled out a one-page document and assigned ratings in the eight accountability areas. In addition, we provided a short comment section allowing managers to include a narrative on an employee’s strengths, weaknesses, and goals.
  4. At the urging of our president, we created a self-evaluation form that also tracked the eight accountability areas. To keep the discussion positive and avoid friction between supervisors and employees on scoring, we did not ask employees to rate themselves numerically. Instead, we asked them to assess their own performance in each accountability area by selecting one of three descriptive boxes: 1) “needs improvement;” 2) “in development and progressing;” or 3) “something I’m doing well.” In addition, we asked them to identify projects that they had worked on, their major accomplishments, and anything they wished they had done better but had learned from. We asked for feedback about their supervisors, including what qualities they appreciated, and what their supervisors or the company might do differently to help them succeed. We also asked about their desires for future growth and development.
  5. For tracking and efficiency purposes, we did away with the hire-anniversary date and went with calendar year for all employees. We added a brief mid-year review where no rating is given, but in which a face-to-face discussion occurs regarding how the employee is doing with respect to the eight accountability areas and his or her annual goals.
  6. Finally, while focusing more on end results, we blended the two annual evaluations into one in order to save management time and provide clarity for employees.

JJ: Since implementing this approach, what have you observed?

SB: There is better communication between managers and employees. There is a better understanding of core company goals, the importance of obtaining results and, subjectively, it seems that teams are working better together. Our construction systems are being used more consistently. This relates directly to one of the eight accountabilities regarding efficient work approach. We had fewer project write-downs in 2013 and fewer customer complaints. Communication within and across groups has improved and supervisors seem more clear on the behavior we need as a company to be successful.

Initially, I worried that employee self-evaluations might create adversarial relations with supervisors. Instead, it actually improved relations and produced an information gold mine. We’ve been able to use the information to improve management training and our processes and systems.

From an HR standpoint, our primary motivation for the new program wasn’t risk management. Yet the new process has created a much more consistent and reliable written record to support status-changing decisions. In addition, it has helped HR get early warnings, in turn making HR staff more effective in heading off trouble. Last, but not least, this process has reinforced that HR is a core part of the leadership team by demonstrating its value related to company success.

JJ: For executives or HR leaders who read this interview and want to experience similar change in their organizations, what do you recommend?

SB: I think most HR professionals know the components of good performance evaluations, but become frustrated by resistance. This resistance comes from the particular history of a company’s performance review system. I would advise them to go slow. Break the big task down into pieces and educate management about each piece. You can help them to see what is working, what isn’t working, and how changing things will help the company. If you move forward too fast with a system that’s technically valid but managers aren’t ready, the missteps may be too difficult to overcome. You can win managers over one step at a time and continue with a better chance of long-term success.

Suzanne Benoit, SPHR, is Director of Human Resources at Wright-Ryan Construction, Inc. and an independent consultant. You can find more of her tips on optimizing human resources strategies on her blog.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C.
Contact
more
less

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.