Appraising appraisals

Management guru Edward Deming once called performance appraisals a deadly disease. Many employees -- and the supervisors assigned to write them -- agree.

The annual employee evaluation, especially when tied to "and here's what your raise will be," is an atrocious practice.

Here's why:

* Many managers aren't properly trained in how to give constructive feedback.

* "One size fits all" appraisal forms make a mockery of individual assessments.

* It takes time to do appraisals well, and most managers are too busy to devote that time.

* Once a year is not enough to provide usable job improvement guidance.

* Appraisals are supposed to be self-improvement tools. Instead, they're often interpreted as punishment and justification for tiny raises.

* Evaluations shouldn't be one-way communication. The best ones foster dialogue.

There are plenty of human resource specialists who sell consulting services and products designed to stop the annual plague of poorly done appraisals. Chief among their suggestions is the 360-degree, or multisource, assessment.

The very mention, however well intentioned, makes some managers sweat.

If you think single-source appraisals are time-consuming and badly done by overstressed, ill-trained supervisors, just think of the ripple effect when a whole bunch of people -- supervisors, peers and subordinates -- are asked to weigh in as well.

According to current "best practice" thinking, 360-degree evaluations are a better way to get a variety of informed opinions about an individual's work and share good suggestions for improvement. In some organizations, that happens.

When done right, 360-degree appraisals reduce the chance of one- on-one bias between a supervisor and his or her employee, and give a fuller picture of a worker's contributions. When done right, they give the worker a clearer understanding of his or her strengths, weaknesses and the impression he or she makes on others.

Those are admirable benefits. But in the real world, the possible benefits aren't always achieved.

Many appraisal forms aren't individualized enough to be meaningful. Many don't even measure the sought-after things. Many evaluators get no training in how to write good evaluations. And most supervisors are too busy with their "real" jobs to devote sufficient time and attention.

In the ideal work world envisioned by Deming and a succession of other appraisal experts, performance evaluations would be individualized, forward-looking rather than historical, career- building and supportive. In the real world, performance appraisals more often are hastily scribbled tick marks on a page, done on deadline so raises can be dished out on workers' employment anniversaries.

In the real world, I once watched a lawyer doing his assigned part to evaluate associates at his law firm. He was checking off ratings on a pile of standardized appraisal forms -- and watching a baseball game at the time.

2000Copyright
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved.