Why Do Some Managers Hate the Performance Evaluation?

Performance appraisal or evaluation is a common practice in the administration of a given company. Every year, organizations go back to their books and identify the exemplary workers from those who are pulling the business down. This practice is a method of ensuring that the organization continues its growth and that employees are undertaking their respective duties to realize the same. However, it is not the easiest or most appropriate method as many are identifying them to be contrary to developing better relationships at the workplace. Performance management systems were intended to help employees realize a clear set of goals that would help them to improve. But in the modern corporation, managers would rather have a root canal rather than evaluate their employee’s performance. The practice has come under a lot of attack from the critics identifying it as an archaic method that should be scrapped away from the modern business setting. The following are some reasons why managers hate the performance evaluation. 

To begin with, managers are noted to have minimal relations with their employees hence the do not have extensive knowledge to conduct the appraisal appropriately. More likely than not, the managers will pass on the task to other individuals as a means of learning about their workers (Allan, 2012). It is also evident that the managers lack appropriate training to conduct the evaluation of the employee. In this regard, the human resource departments usually design the process, the forms and give the manager a deadline on when the evaluation should be complete. The manager has little say in the matter creating some resistance between the parties involved (Allan, 2012). Research shows that such an occurrence will lead to high levels of bias and impact of recency. The passage of time will affect the actual performance evaluation of the worker whereby the most recent behavior of the staff is easily remembered while the rest is forgotten (Heathfield, 2017). The halo and contrast effects in evaluating organizational behavior are a common practice among the managers which is a major failure of the process. 

The competent manager should undertake important traits as an appropriate measure for ensuring the proper improvement of behavior among his subordinates. One of the steps is through communication that would help managers better understand and know their employees. The manager should be aware of each worker independently by carrying out both oral and written communication (Allan, 2012). This practice is possible through creating an environment of employee involvement in decision making and an open-door policy. Another trait to implement is setting goals both short-term and long-term together with the subordinates so as to give them a focus in their efforts (Heathfield, 2017). The supervisor can monitor the progress of each worker through this practice and uses it as a clear measure of employee performance. The active manager should not wait for the human resource department to require performance evaluations rather he could develop his system of evaluating workers on a monthly basis and provide them with feedback on the most appropriate means of improving. 

As mentioned earlier, the majority of the managers do not have the necessary skills of conducting an evaluation of their employee’s performance. In this regard, there are common mistakes that such a manager may encounter. Confusing growth and excellence is a common practice that managers may fail to realize as they administer similar criteria in the evaluation for the top performers as for the struggling employees. Unconscious bias is another mistake made by supervisors where they make judgments of their based on unintended bias. Even the most competent manager may do the same without knowing (Heathfield, 2017). Some may perform one of the most common mistakes by evaluating attitude rather than the performance. In this case, struggling employees may have a very positive attitude but continue to fail in achieving the goals that have been set for them (Allan, 2012). As a result, their supervisors commend them for the little work they have done and the root problem is not solved (Heathfield, 2017). Some managers may also avoid using negative feedback as a measure of preventing backlash from the employees. However, it is important to note that poor performance should be called out as it is and the necessary steps should be addressed timely. 

The manager should prepare well to conduct a successful employee evaluation of the staff members. Having regular discussions with the employees on progress, satisfaction level and challenges they face. This measure ensures that performance appraisal is integral to daily activities throughout the year and not just at the last minute (Heathfield, 2017). The manager should also document employee events carefully. This practice is a key measure of ensuring that recent performance bias is not used to evaluate the entire year. Through establishing objectives that employees should undertake at the start of the financial period is a useful measure of ensuring guidance to their various duties (Heathfield, 2017). Supervisors should also realize that performance appraisal is not all about pointing out the negative aspects by accentuating positive factors. Conducting a mid-year review also reduces the pressure of waiting until the end of the year and enables workers to make improvements in the latter half of the year. 

References 

Allan, L. (2012, Aug 7) Why Managers and Employees Hate Performance Appraisal Time . Training Zone, Retrieved from http://www.trainingzone.co.uk/community/blogs/leslie-allan/why-managers-and-employees-hate-performance-appraisal-time 

Heathfield, S. M. (2017, Apr 13) 10 Tips for Effective Performance Reviews . The Balance, Retrieved from https://www.thebalance.com/effective-performance-review-tips-1918842