Anticipating and Minimizing Negative Consequences

Anticipating and Minimizing Negative Consequences

1. Anticipating Damage Caused by Flawed Performance Managemnent

   • Damage caused to employees
     • Lowered self-esteem
     • Lowered self-esteem
     • Employee burnout and job dissatisfaction:
   • Damage caused to managers
     • Time wasted
     • Avoidance of the system
   • Damage caused to relationships
     • Emerging biases
     • Varying and unfair standards and ratings
   • Damage caused to the organization
     • Increased turnover
     • Use of misleading information
     • Wasted time and money
     • Unclear ratings system
     • Increased risk of litigation

2. Learning from Flawed Performance Ratings

   • when ratings are not working, need to look under the surface to understand Then you can think about how to create a better connection between them and your organization’s strategic objectives, performance dimensions that are under the employee’s control, and how to gather ratings in a more practical manner why
   • three reasons why performance ratings are dysfunctional
     • Ratings are not directly related to an organization’s strategic goals.
     • Ratings don’t refer to performance dimensions that are under the control of the employee.
     • It takes too long for supervisors to fill out complicated and convoluted evaluation forms.

3. Why Performance Ratings Are Here to Stay

   • measuring performance isn’t easy
   • to make sure ratings measure what matters and measure those things well, setting up an appeals process is an important feature to minimize potential negative consequences of performance management.

4. Setting up an appeals process

   • Dealing with judgmental and administrative issues
     • Judgmental issues are about the validity of the performance evaluation.
     • Administrative issues are about policies and procedures.
   • Setting up a three-level appeals process
     • Level 1: Appeal sent to HR Department HR gathers necessary fact HR contacts rater and suggests corrective actions (if necessary)
     • Level 2: Appeal sent to outside Arbitrator review the case, gather additional information as needed, votes, and/or forwards to a high-level manager
     • Level 3: High-level manager Take panel’s vote into consideration and make final decision

5. Setting Up a Communication Plan and Dealing with Resistance to Change

   • Questions that your communication plan should answer
     • What is performance management?
     • How does performance management fit into our strategy?
     • What’s in it for me?
     • How does it work?
     • What are my responsibilities?
     • How is performance management related to other initiatives?
   • Dealing with cognitive biases
     • There are three types of biases that affect the effectiveness of a communication plan
       • Selective exposure
       • Selective perception
       • Selective retention
     • there are several ways to minimize the negative impact of these biases, and therefore, help mitigate potential damage done by performance management
       • Involve employees.
       • Understand the employee needs
       • Strike first
       • Provide facts and consequences
       • Put it in writing
       • Use multiple channels of communication
       • Use credible communicators
       • Say it, and then, say it again