|
articles & white papers on
Talent Retention Team
Building
& Performance Management
http://knowledge.wpcarey.asu.edu
Knowledge@W. P. Carey
(Subscription) - Tempe,USA
Fear
and Loathing in the Office: Studying the Art of the Performance Review
Annual
performance reviews are dreaded by many employees. Turns out they're not much
fun for managers, either. In fact, many mangers treat these performance reviews
less as an opportunity to help their staffers than a painful chore -- something
to cross off their list so they can return to more important matters.
"Unfortunately, that's the way a lot of managers view the appraisal process,"
says
Angelo Kinicki, a professor of management
at the
W.P.
Carey
School of Business. "They say, 'It's something I have to do.' It's
generally not fun for them."
Fun or not,
performance reviews are an important tool managers can use to improve employee
performance. The feedback -- either positive or negative -- employees receive in
these meetings can sharpen their performance, help them overcome their personal
challenges and, in the best-case scenario, transform a bad worker into a good
one.
But while
business researchers have known for years that managers should offer
their workers feedback, they haven't come up with the best practices on how
that feedback should be delivered. So Kinicki, along with colleagues Gregory
E. Prussia of Seattle University, Frances M. McKee-Ryan of Oregon State
University and W. P. Carey School colleague Bin Wu recently set out to answer
that long unresolved question: What's the best way to deliver performance
feedback?
"When people go
into a performance review and get feedback from their bosses," Kinicki says,
"the question is: 'Is there a certain way that a manager can deliver feedback
that increases an employee's willingness to respond to feedback?'" The answer,
Kinicki and the team found, is a resounding yes. Feedback, the team says, is
more likely to be accepted by employees -- and employees are more likely to take
positive action on the feedback -- if the criticism is given in specific,
detailed terms, by a trusted, knowledgeable manager, in an environment that has
been carefully cultivated to be feedback-friendly.
In other words,
the researchers say, there's a lot more to giving feedback than most managers
think. And to get the best return from those painful annual reviews, managers
and companies have to take several factors into consideration. "You will not get
behavioral change in response to feedback unless the employee accepts it and
perceives that it is accurate," Kinicki says. "People have to accept feedback.
If they don't accept it, you'll get no change. That tells us that the
fundamental issue in performance reviews is for managers to deliver feedback in
such a way that employees accept it."
The new feedback
research is closely connected to Kinicki's recent work on so-called Performance
Management Leadership (PML), a management style that emphasizes staff
cultivation by helping employees get better every day. Successful application of
PML methods requires that managers communicate often -- and communicate well --
with their employees.
While researchers
have previously studied the art of giving feedback, Kinicki says his new
research on performance feedback, published recently in the Journal of
Applied Psychology, is the first to take a comprehensive look at how people
perceive, accept, and ultimately react to feedback. "What's very different
about this work is that we're investigating the cognitive process that drives
the behavioral change associated with performance feedback," Kinicki says.
"People have not studied that process. We simply do not understand the cognitive
process that underlies an employee's response to feedback."
For the research,
the team surveyed nearly 200 loan officers located at 24 different branches of
the same bank. The loan officers were asked by the researchers to complete a
survey about their most recent performance reviews, two weeks after that review
was given. The surveys were designed to help the researchers get a fuller
picture of the workers' environment, and the way they felt about their
performance reviews, based on six predetermined criteria. The researchers wanted
to know how conducive the bank's environment was to constructive feedback (feedback-rich
environment), how accurate employees perceived their reviews to be (perceived
accuracy), how much they trusted the source of their reviews (source
credibility), how motivated they were to respond to feedback (desire to
respond) and how likely they were to respond to the feedback (intended
response).
The final
criteria -- performance -- was obtained a year after the first round of
reviews. By comparing each employee's progress, or lack of progress, in the
months following the first review, Kinicki and the research team could see how
each responded to their feedback. The team could then begin to understand how
delivery of feedback affected employee performance. "We gave this survey to the
employees after they had their reviews and asked them basically to evaluate the
feedback that was received: Was it specific? How much feedback did they get
throughout the year? Does the boss actually know what he or she is doing?"
Kinicki said. "We asked them if they believed the feedback. Did they want to
respond to it? Did they intend to respond to it? Then we came back one year
later and obtained data on employees' most recent performance appraisal. We were
trying to determine whether the reaction that people have shortly after their
performance appraisal influences their behavior 12 months later."
It does. The team
found that several factors -- the specificity and timeliness of feedback, the
credibility of the manager who delivered it, and the system by which reviews
were conducted -- influenced whether employees accepted feedback and
subsequently reacted to it. The work has three major implications for managers.
First, Kinicki says, because an employee's response to feedback is more
contingent upon their "cognitive processing" of that feedback than the substance
of the feedback itself, managers need to consider how their delivery of feedback
impacts the perceived accuracy of the feedback.
Specifically,
managers would be smart to employ so-called "instrumental leadership" by laying
out specific goals for their employees, monitoring how well the employees go
about reaching those goals, and rewarding them for a job well done. "It is
unlikely that employees will accurately perceive, have a desire to respond to,
or intend to respond to feedback without instrumental leadership," the team
wrote.
Second, because
"the credibility of the source providing feedback has both direct and indirect
effects on employees' desire to respond to feedback," managers must be aware of
how they are perceived by employees. The study was unequivocal in its finding
that employees are more likely to take action on feedback when they trust the
source of that feedback. Consider the following example. "Let's say a new
manager who has never written anything in his or her entire life tells a
professional writer 'You're a bad writer.'" Kinicki says. "This is an example
of low source credibility. If, by contrast, the same manager has written two
books and multiple magazine articles, suddenly this manager has a lot more
credibility." Employees tend to respond to feedback given by credible sources.
Finally, the
study indicates that companies should ensure that employees trust the appraisal
system used to create performance reviews. Because employees were found
"unlikely to accept, desire to respond, or intend to respond to feedback based
on information derived from an invalid or inaccurate appraisal system," the
study encouraged organizations to "spend the time and resources needed to
improve the accuracy" of those systems. One way to do that, says Kinicki, is to
make feedback a year-round, everyday activity. There's no reason, he says, why
employees should wait twelve months to hear how they are doing at their jobs.
"In a lot of organizations, people use performance appraisals as a once-a-year
ritual to give feedback, and the ones that think they are really progressive
have quarterly reviews," Kinicki says. "My personal feeling is that feedback
should be an ongoing thing. That's one of the dimensions of PML -- it should be
happening constantly. I mean, why wait? Why wait for every quarter?"
Putting the
lessons of the research into practice can also help managers overcome one of the
great obstacles of performance reviews: Delivering bad news. "Delivering
constructive criticism" has long been a tough task for managers, both because of
the discomfort it creates for the employee and because of the fact that people
have a tendency to discount negative feedback in the first place, Kinicki says.
"Research shows
that it's psychologically healthier for us to have a positive view of ourselves,
even if you're not a great employee," Kinicki says. "This positive illusion
maintains one's self-esteem. It makes us feel good. It's healthy. So when I give
you bad feedback, it's going against that belief, and you will say, 'That guy
doesn't know what he's talking about...' The giving of negative feedback leads
to conflict, and who wants conflict? We avoid it, and generally as a result we
give people more favorable performance ratings than they deserve. It's an
historical problem."
But by avoiding
the difficult task of telling an employee that they need to do better, a manager
is undercutting his or her ability to get the most out of their staffers -- and
preventing their company from running at peak performance. It is essential for
managers to provide specific, descriptive feedback in a timely manner. Kinicki
does not promise that, by building their credibility, creating a feedback-rich
environment and delivering the bad news in highly specific terms, a manager will
make the job of telling an employee about their shortcomings any easier. But he
does say it can, at the very least, make the experience a worthwhile one.
"If we don't give feedback to our people," Kinicki says, "how can we possibly
improve their performance?"
Globe
and Mail - Canada
High praise from colleagues counts
Peer-recognition programs are springing up in workplaces across Canada, as a
growing number of employers see the payoff of encouraging employees to encourage
each other.
The
black leather bag Frederic Beauchemin totes to work every morning is one of his
prized possessions. It's not because there's anything really special about it.
"It's a nice bag, but I had another one before this," he says. Rather, it's a
constant reminder of plaudits he received from the people he works with. Mr.
Beauchemin, a unit manager at SCO Health Service, a long-term health care centre
in Ottawa, was presented with the bag 18 months ago when he received a
peer-recognition award for which he'd been nominated by his work colleagues. He considers it "10 times more valuable" than any accolades he might
receive from senior management because it came from "peers who see you day in
and day out, and see what you do behind the scenes."
That's
typical of the response to peer-recognition programs that are springing up in
workplaces across Canada, as a growing number of employers recognize the value
of creating ways of encouraging employees to encourage each other. "One of the
clearest ways to empower people in an organization is to have them all involved
in deciding who gets recognition," says Kitchener, Ont.-based leadership
consultant Jim Clemmer. It is a trend that goes along with a less hierarchical
workplace, where teamwork is valued over competition and employees are more
likely to get ahead by patting each other on the back than by stabbing each
other in the back.
More
companies are seeing the importance of recognizing their employees as a boost to
morale, loyalty, retention and recruiting. But while company recognition
programs are typically highly structured, management-run initiatives, peer
recognition provides employees with opportunities to celebrate each other, says
Jo-Anne Pusateri, director of consulting services at Mississauga-based Maritz
Canada Inc., which specializes in reward and incentive programs.
About
35 per cent of major U.S. companies now have peer-recognition programs, up from
25 per cent five years ago, according to surveys conducted by Mercer Human
Resource Consulting. While similar figures are not available in Canada, most
organizations here have some kind of recognition programs -- and there is
growing appreciation for the particular value of peer praise, says Iain Morris,
a principal in Mercer's Toronto office.
A
recent survey of 1,002 employees across North America conducted by Maritz
Research found that employees' intentions to remain long-term with their company
doubled when they received the type of recognition they desire. The right kind
of recognition also increased the likelihood they would recommend their
workplace to others. For recipients, the real reward comes from the satisfaction
of being appreciated by colleagues. It doesn't hurt to catch the attention of
senior managers, either. Mr. Beauchemin says that receiving his award in 2004
"opened doors" and helped him along his career path, gaining him such notice by
higher-ups and getting him invited to participate in a leadership training
session. The experience also made Mr. Beauchemin more attuned to the importance
of giving recognition, particularly in a stressful health care environment,
where "praising and getting praised is not normally something we have time to
do." Employees who do the nominating also see a payoff, earning the nominee's
good will, showing themselves to be team players and catching management's eye.
"You're demonstrating to the organization that you are very good at providing
constructive feedback, being aware of performance requirements and identifying
people that support it effectively," Ms. Pusateri says. "It might be the first
glimpse that executives or people in HR might have of that person's ability to
provide constructive feedback and grow."
Delta
Hotels is one organization paying attention to the benefits of peer recognition.
"It's an inclusive process, whereby employees recognize their own. We're getting
away from that politicized employee of the month, management's favourite
person," says Bill Pallett, senior vice-president of people and quality at
Toronto-based Delta, a subsidiary of Fairmont Hotels & Resorts Inc., which
operates several peer-recognition programs. Under them, employees nominate peers
for recognition awards in several categories that correspond to corporate
objectives, such as customer service, community service and maintaining the
National Quality Institute's standards for a healthy workplace. "We have seen
year over year in our employee opinion scores that the area of reward and
recognition has improved," says Mr. Pallett, who believes that contributes
directly to retaining employees and achieving corporate goals.
Duncan,
B.C.-based Island Savings Credit Union operates several peer-recognition
programs, including one that allows employees to hand out "WOW" points that can
be redeemed for gift certificates and other rewards including services
volunteered by senior managers, such as babysitting for employees working on
Saturdays, a round of golf or a trip on a yacht. "It's a great incentive," says
Scott Keeping, a Victoria, B.C.-based investment adviser with Island Savings.
Employees at Markham, Ont.-based Ceridian Canada Ltd. have good reason to be
excited about the top rewards offered in its program, which recognizes 28 "star"
employees each quarter. Each receives a $100 gift certificate. At year end, 15
are selected to go on an overseas trip with spouses and senior executives. The
destinations in previous years have included London, Paris and Costa Rica. This
year, the trip will visit several African countries. With prizes like these, the
quest for recognition is "quite competitive," says Jim Thomson, director of
human resources operations.
While
the Maritz survey found that the right kind of recognition boosts employee
loyalty, the flip side is that recognition programs that did not meet their
needs was likely to have a negative effect on employee motivation and retention,
according to Rick Garlick, director of consulting and strategic implementation
for Maritz Research. Mr. Morris agrees. "Recognizing the wrong people and being
inconsistent as to how rewards are granted is a real demotivator," he says. "You
need to continually assess programs and make sure the program is clearly
communicated. You need to be clear about what types of behaviours are to be
rewarded and make an effort to monitor it to make sure it's successful."
While a
good peer recognition program should involve as much employee participation as
possible, HR experts also say that management must monitor and ensure that
programs meet company objectives. Ms. Pusateri suggests clear guidelines about
what kind of behaviour should be recognized, particularly important when a
program involves tangible rewards. You don't want people accumulating
recognition points just because they have a lot of friends in the company nor
awarding points to someone for picking up their Tim Hortons coffee in the
morning, she says.
At
Ceridian, there are stringent criteria for nominations, and selections are made
by committees composed of a mix of employees and managers. The company also
holds employee focus groups to solicit feedback on its program and has acted on
recommendations such as having more front-line staff and fewer senior executives
be included in the selection committees. Mr. Thomson says Ceridian's employees
appreciate having an opportunity to praise each other. "We don't have to push
this program at all," he says. "The employees like working with one another and,
when one of their co-workers does something above and beyond, they know they
have a way of rewarding that."
Doing
it right
Here
are some tips, culled from the experts, on how to make the most of
peer-recognition programs:
For
managers:
-
Make sure
that employees are involved in running the program, but retain enough
management control to protect the company's interests.
-
Create
clear guidelines that link the behaviour that is to be recognized in employees
with corporate goals.
-
Ensure that
employees are aware of the program and encourage as much participation as
possible.
-
Monitor
participation to guard against favouritism or cliques, and ensure programs
involve a large number of employees, not just a few making all the
recommendations.
-
Take notice
of those who are doing well at recognizing peers, as signs of employees who
are displaying worthy team-building and other leadership skills.
Keep the
process fair or its impact will be the opposite of what was intended.
For
employees:
-
Show you
are a team player by supporting the program.
-
Generate
good will and contribute to a positive working environment by recognizing your
peers.
-
Make sure
your nominations for recognition are appropriate and in keeping with the
program's policies and goals.
-
If
you are nominated, show gratitude to your peers and take advantage of the
opportunity to showcase your talents to senior managers.
-
Remember
that the program will help you get recognition, whether it is in receiving a
nomination, or in making the nomination.
http://www.canadianbusiness.com
Canadian Business - Toronto,Ontario,Canada
From the February 13-26,
2006 Issue of Canadian Business Magazine
Andy Holloway
In praise of praise: employee recognition
Employee-recognition programs are often in-house jokes. Just ask anyone who has
received a company-branded crystal figurine for 10 years of service. Or coupons
for fast-food joints, like some companies hand out. Or, worse, had her photo
taken for the dubious honour of being "employee of the month." Such efforts are
done with the best of intentions to improve morale, but frequently have the
opposite effect. There's no doubt that employees want to be recognized for their
work, and while cash is always good, it's not everything. "The buck is not the
be-all and end-all," says Peter Hart, CEO of Rideau Inc., a
Montreal company that designs corporate
recognition systems. "If it was, I'd be in serious trouble,"
All kidding aside, Hart says employees also want a little extra attention that
cold, hard cash can't provide. As psychologist Abraham Maslow pointed out,
people have a hierarchy of emotional needs that, in the workplace, can be
partially met by being recognized by their colleagues and superiors. Such
appreciation is also good for employers. At their best, formal recognition
programs pay for themselves through reduced turnover and increased employee
satisfaction. It costs a Fortune 2000 company roughly US$6,000 to hire a single
employee, so keeping their current high-performers happy is important--even more
so today with the squeeze on human capital as baby boomers start retiring.
"Retention is directly tied to recognition," says Hart. "People join companies,
but they quit their managers."
Don't think it matters? In a 2004 study,
Northwestern
University in
Evanston,
Ill., found direct links between employee
satisfaction, customer satisfaction and financial performance. Yet
Gallup the same year reported 65% of American
employees received no recognition for their efforts. No doubt that's why so many
workers feel disconnected from their workplace, a disconnect that
Gallup says cost the
U.S. economy roughly US$300 billion in 2000
alone.
The trick is figuring out how to make recognition meaningful and rewarding for
both sides. "The real good recognition programs don't just recognize
achievement; they recognize people's behaviours and activities that lead to
achievement," says Hart. Tacky trinkets just don't cut it. But before throwing
iPods at everyone, managers have to figure out what behaviours they want to
reward and establish a benchmark of employee attitudes before starting a
recognition program. Then, and only then, can they judge whether the programs
are effective.
It's also important to remember that different types of employees value
different things, says Michael Mullarkey, CEO of Workstream Inc., a provider of
human resources software and services in Ottawa. For example, he adds, engineers or
technologists "value training and investment in their existing education more
than a gold watch," so reward programs should be tailored to meet those needs.
Two other common pitfalls companies often fall into is to offer rewards in one
division but not others, or offer rewards of varying value. Recognition programs
should be consistently applied across the company, Mullarkey advises.
But recognition doesn't stop with a nice gift. Employees also want a proper
presentation by their managers, says Hart. The best award he ever received
wasn't a cruise or an iPod. It was a stone. That's right, a stone--just your
regular garden-variety stone--from Telus Corp. Hart didn't need a paperweight,
but the presenter made it memorable. "I will never ever take that stone off my
desk, because every time I look at it I remember how she spoke to me and what it
meant to me," says Hart. "Even if the value of the award isn't very much, a
manager can take that all away by saying, 'Hey, this is not a lot, but it is a
token of our appreciation.'"
For those of us with a more material bent, companies such as Rideau and
Workstream can set up points programs that can be redeemed for such products as
electronics, gift cards and vacations, even cruises.
If a company is too cash-strapped to spring for the goods, there are a number of
less expensive ways to show appreciation (see sidebar), from positive reviews to
holiday cards to taking an employee for lunch. Remember: a little recognition
goes a long way.
Pat on the back
Reward programs don't have to cost much. Check out Peter Hart's Top 10 ways to
honour your staff.
1. Send and personalize holiday cards by including a reference to an especially
important accomplishment from earlier in the year.
2. Give an employee a day off to cater to his favourite charity. Invite him to
report on it for the company newsletter
3. Surprise your staff with a home-cooked meal.
4. Take an employee to lunch at his favourite restaurant and ask him how
business can be improved.
5. Write a thank-you note, but be specific. Mention three things that make you
appreciative that employee works for you.
6. Organize a day of thankfulness that allows colleagues to honour the service
of up to three of their peers with gifts.
7. Announce a program to match your employees' charitable donations, up to $100
each.
8. Bring in recreational experts--such as a golf pro, eBay power seller or
decorator--to teach employees new skills.
9. Have a gift related to your employee's favourite hobby inscribed with a
personal message. Sign and date it.
10. Give employees a positive review telling them what's great about what they
do. Make it 15 minutes long--and mean it
By WALLACE
IMMEN
June 1, 2005
You
like me, you really like me
Homemaking guru Martha Stewart learned a hard truth on the way to doing hard
time.
"The lesson is: like it or not, life is a popularity contest" and what makes
people popular is being likeable, says leadership coach Tim Sanders, author of
the new book, The Likeability Factor, How to Boost Your L-Factor and Achieve
Your Life's Dreams.
"Your boss, a colleague or a customer will listen and be more likely to believe
you and give you more opportunities if you are likeable. At the same time,
being mean-spirited and negative will ultimately limit your success," the staff
leadership coach for Yahoo Inc. in San Francisco says.
 Ms.
Stewart offers perfect proof, he says. During her 2004 trial, former staff and
associates turned against her, testifying that she was mean-spirited, prone to
tantrums, hypocritical and overly demanding. "When
times got tough, the folks she'd been negative with got even." Not only did she
end up doing jail time but a February
Gallup poll
found that 60 per cent of men and 42 per cent of women in the United States were
unsympathetic to her.
But
since her release from prison in March, Mr. Sanders says he has seen her strive
to appear more likeable.
For example, at a press conference in New York in early May announcing the
launch of her TV show, a spinoff to The Apprentice, Ms. Stewart emphasized that
"I really like people a tremendous amount and I like talking to them." "She
appears to have taken a hard look in the mirror and realized she needs people to
be behind her," Mr. Sanders says. It's a strategy that everyone who wants to get
ahead in their careers should take to heart, he advises, for a number of studies
that are the basis of his book conclude that popularity is the best predictor of
success
in the
workplace.
Every person has an "L-factor" --an indicator of how likeable you are.
Likeable employees are friendly, communicative, open and connect with others.
They are seen by colleagues as trustworthy, motivated and hard-working, and are
more likely to get on the fast track for promotions as well as inspire
performance in others. Those with a low likeability factor, on the other hand,
tend to be unfriendly, quick to anger and hold grudges against others. Perceived
by others as arrogant, conniving and manipulative, they tend to be left out of
discussions and passed over for promotions. No matter how likeable you think you
already are, there is always room for improvement, Mr. Sanders says.
Here's his formula for making yourself more likeable:
n
Be aware
Take care to observe the things you habitually do, how people react to you and
them, and what you need to change to make people feel warmer toward you.
Express friendliness
Eliminate unfriendliness from your behaviour because it lowers your likeability.
"Repeat a friendliness mantra as you head to work in the morning," Mr. Sanders
suggests.
Your unconscious message when you meet others should be: "I like you. I'm open
to you and your opinions."
n
Be relevant
You have to create bridges that connect you with others so they want to relate
to you.
Learn people's passions when they aren't at work; golfing, gardening or pets are
great conversation starters. Mr. Sander's favourite question to ask: "Tell me
something about yourself that's really cool."
n
Be empathetic
This means being a good listener and respecting other people's feelings -- but
it doesn't mean trying to intervene and fix whatever is making someone upset or
unhappy.
It's important that people feel they can be heard without being judged. If they
want your help, they will ask for it.
n
Be real
The key to sustaining a career is to be honest and to actually do the job stated
on your business card. If you're a manager, get out on the floor with your staff
rather than hiding behind an office door. People respond enthusiastically to
enthusiasm but if you're just playing a role you don't feel, it won't inspire
others, Mr. Sanders says.
One of the best ways to stay relevant to the needs of others is to read widely
about your industry, he says, helping you offer more in conversation and become
seen as a mentor at work.
For his book, he surveyed chief executive officers of companies with more than
500 employees and found that the average CEO reads seven business books a year,
compared with the average person, who reads less than one .
Even the most unlikeable person can make a significant change in only a few
months, Mr. Sanders says.
The key is to admit you have a problem, he says. "Tell your co-workers you are
trying to improve your interpersonal skills. Say you welcome feedback."
That can be difficult, but once you start getting positive feedback, you will
set up a new pattern that sets you up for making likeability a part of your
life, he says.
Yes, some people still seem to get ahead by being vindictive and disliked, but
Mr. Sanders believes they will ultimately be losers.
"You've got to remember that it's still the middle of the movie," he notes. In
films, the bad guys often do well for the first hour but end up faring badly in
the end.
Boost your L-factor
Here are five ways, from career coach and author Tim Sanders:
1.
Make a commitment to always be friendly, even when you are required to
deliver tough or bad news. If you do not like someone, never express it
publicly.
2.
Return smiles, every time. When you smile back at someone, you send
positive feedback to others and it becomes a feedback loop.
3.
Listen for emotions as well as facts in what people say. A person who
is experiencing sadness or disgust will not be receptive to suggestions, so be
supportive, don't try to fix their problems.
4.
When you are incorrect, admit it. Never cover up a mistake.
5.
Develop a sincere interest in the passions and hobbies of the five people you
see most in your career
http://www.bizjournals.com
San Jose Business Journal
- CA,USA
Connie Glaser
Monday, April 25, 2005
Stop being afraid of performance review
Best-selling author and keynote speaker Connie Glaser is one of the country's
leading experts on women in business and closing the leadership gender gap. Her
books include Swim with the Dolphins and the recently published What
Queen Esther Knew. A prominent speaker at corporate and business
conferences, she can be reached at
www.connieglaser.com
No workplace ritual
tops the performance review in terms of causing anxiety and stress. "It’s like
getting a report card," acknowledges Carol Deutsch, a communications consultant.
"And it intimidates everyone, at every level of the company hierarchy."
Although you may
dread being evaluated, your performance review can, in fact, be a powerful tool.
It gives you a chance to ask your boss specific questions about your job. And
because you have the boss's undivided attention, it's the perfect time to
showcase your talents and prove your overall benefit to the company. A
performance review also provides you with a golden opportunity to pinpoint your
strengths and weaknesses and to find out how -- at least in your employer's eyes
-- you can improve.
But if the thought of
a performance evaluation makes you break out in a cold sweat, try these tips to
make your next review work for you.
Find out when your
next performance review is scheduled and give yourself time (at least a month)
to get prepared. Pull out a copy of your job description and study it carefully.
Are you meeting all the requirements listed? If you are, make a quick list of
your accomplishments in each category. And if there are areas where you are
weak, jot down ideas on how you can improve. Then get to work on these
immediately. Studies show that employers tend to remember more of what you have
accomplished within the two to three weeks prior to your performance review, so
take advantage of this opportunity to shine.
Unfortunately, the
evaluation forms most companies use aren't set up to recognize any work you've
done that goes beyond your job description. But that doesn't mean these
accomplishments should be excluded from the review. It does, however, mean that
it will be up to you to toot your own horn. Unfortunately, women are usually
reluctant to boast about their achievements. To avoid that risk, think of every
instance in which you've gone the extra mile and write it down. List every
special project you’ve worked on, every committee you've served on and what your
contributions were to each. Take this list with you and be prepared to share it
with your boss.
Try to approach your
review calmly and professionally, and if you've planned ahead, this should be
easier to accomplish. During your evaluation, be sure to use body language that
says you're confident, comfortable and genuinely interested in what your boss
has to say. Don't frown, stare at the floor or slump in your chair. Instead,
smile, make direct eye contact and sit slightly forward in the chair to show
you're interested in what the boss has to say.
Typically, at the end
of a performance review, your boss will ask if you have any questions. Instead
of saying no and bolting for the door, have several thoughtful questions ready.
Asking questions tells your employer that you're interested in your job and the
company. Take advantage of this golden opportunity to get your supervisor's
input on where you stand, how promising your chances are for a promotion, and
what you can do to get ahead. This is also the ideal time to highlight your
recent accomplishments.
Taking the time to
prepare will definitely pay off!
http://theglobeandmail.com
By WALLACE IMMEN
May 4, 2005
Lawyers expect large punitive damages to be sought in
wrongful dismissal cases
A record punitive
damage award to a former Honda Canada Inc. employee who suffers from chronic
fatigue syndrome "strikes a significant victory for employees," says Norman
Grosman, a senior partner in the Toronto employment law firm Grosman, Grosman &
Gale LLP.
The $500,000 award -- unprecedented in an employment case and
now being appealed by Honda -- will also open the floodgates to punitive damage
claims in wrongful dismissal cases, employment law specialists predict.
The award made to
35-year-old Kevin Keays, a 14-year Honda employee, came after Mr. Justice John
McIssac of the Ontario Superior Court ruled last month that the company "formed
a protracted corporate conspiracy" to deprive him of his rights by intimidating
him and eventually terminating his employment.
The decision "sends a
message to employers and companies large and small that outrageous,
reprehensible conduct towards employees is not going to be tolerated and that,
when it occurs, the courts are going to be willing to address it," says Hugh
Scher, a partner with Scher & De Angelis LLP in Toronto, who represented Mr.
Keays but wouldn't allow him to be interviewed while the case is under appeal.
"The case speaks to the legitimacy of chronic fatigue syndrome as a disability,
but I don't think it is limited to that. The same principles would apply to any
person with a disability who is treated with discriminatory or harassing fashion
and is subjected to outrageous or reprehensible treatment from an employer
because of their disability," Mr. Scher adds.
Because the ruling
was unequivocal, lawyers expect claims for punitive damages to become standard
in wrongful dismissal cases. "We expect to see a barrage of claims. . .Everyone
alleging wrongful dismissal is also going to seek large punitive damages," which
are payments added to the usual compensatory awards as a form of punishment,
says Caroline Ursulak, an employment law specialist with Ogilvy Renault LLP in
Toronto.
Mr. Scher, for
instance, says he is representing two other people who allege wrongful dismissal
because of chronic fatigue syndrome and will make claims for punitive damages.
He says he also knows of similar cases across the country.
Ms. Ursulak says her
firm sent a newsletter to its corporate clients warning they may now face
"limitless" claims for punitive damages, which have been rare in past employment
cases. The $500,000 judgment dwarfs previous awards in employment cases, ranging
between $10,000 and $25,000.
She also notes that
a similar rush occurred after the Supreme Court of Canada, in a 1997 case known
as Jack Wallace vs. United Grain Growers, ordered the company to give extra
compensation because of what the judge called "bad faith," or disrespect at the
time of Mr. Wallace's firing.
"What we saw after
that decision is that every plaintiff no matter what the employer did makes a
'Wallace claim' asking damages for bad faith," Ms. Ursulak says. In his ruling,
Judge McIssac called Honda's decision to fire Mr. McIssac "outrageous" and said
it should "make the blood boil of any right-thinking individual."Mr. Keays had
always received "glowing" performance reviews in his job as a quality
engineering associate and computer specialist, the decision states. But in 1996,
Mr. Keays went on long-term disability when he was diagnosed with chronic
fatigue syndrome.
Honda ordered him
back to work in December, 1998, but he had recurring day-long absences due to
CFS symptoms. In August, 1998, he missed four days of work and the company began
a progressive discipline process because he was not meeting attendance
expectations. As his absences continued, the company ordered him in early 2000
to submit to a medical assessment by a specialist. At that point, Mr. Keays'
hired Mr. Scher, who advised him to send a letter to Honda asking for
clarification of the "purpose, methodology and parameters of the proposed
assessment." When Honda would not provide the clarification and ordered him to
take the assessment, "based on my advice, Mr. Keays declined to attend," Mr.
Scher says.
Because of that, Mr.
Keays was dismissed for insubordination in March, 2000, and filed a suit arguing
Honda did not have just cause to dismiss him, Mr. Scher says. The judge ruled
Mr. Keays was entitled to 15 months pay for the wrongful dismissal as well as
another nine months pay -- his 'Wallace award' -- for bad faith in the way it
dismissed him. But he then went on to order Honda to pay an additional $500,000
for its "outrageous and high-handed conduct."
Ms. Ursulak says this
"puts employers in an awful predicament because they are entitled to information
and they are going to have to look very carefully at how they handle employees
who are reluctant to give it." Most organizations across the country have
attendance management policies very much like Honda's, she notes.
Honda will not
comment on the case while it appeals the decision, says Jim Miller Sr., Honda
Canada's vice-president of corporate affairs. Honda's lawyer, Dan Dooley of
Purser, Dooley LLP in Barrie, Ont., says he does not know when the appeal, filed
last week, will be heard.
In the meantime,
lawyers do see this as a win for employees. "I think this champions the
employees' right to know that there is a solution when they are mistreated in
this fundamental way," Mr. Grosman says.
"The impression I
get is that the judge found that Honda remained very skeptical of the level of
credibility of the illness. I think it's okay for an employer to have a healthy
degree of skepticism but the degree snowballed to the point where they
disbelieved the employee," Mr. Grosman adds.
"I don't think Honda
took a very considered approach to the situation and, without doubt, they didn't
take a very compassionate approach. And it ended up with the judge finding they
didn't take a very credible approach to the situation. And those three Cs ended
up adding up to $500,000," he says.
Mr. Grosman
questions whether the court of appeal will uphold such a huge award and
cautioned that it may raise the expectations of fired employees to unrealistic
levels.
"I'm not sure this is
going to make it easier to get a punitive damage award and you are not going to
see a lot more six-figure awards," Mr. Grosman says.
"In the end, this
may be a one-off decision that isn't going to have a huge domino effect."
PRNewswire
May 11, 2005
http://www.careerbuilder.com
One-Third of Sales Workers Don't Feel
Motivated by Their Company Leaders
Today's Sales professionals are voicing a
lack of confidence in their company leaders and a desire to seek out greener
pastures. Thirty-three percent of Sales professionals recently surveyed by
CareerBuilder.com said their corporate leaders are ineffective in motivating
employees. At the same time, one half of Sales professionals say they can do
their supervisor's job better. The CareerBuilder.com survey, "Life at Work
2004: Sales," was conducted from February 19, 2004 to February 29, 2004 and
included more than 130 Sales workers.
"On average, one-in-five Sales professionals has worked for ten or more
companies," said Mary Delaney, Chief Sales Officer for CareerBuilder.com.
"High voluntary turnover rates and unmotivated staffs are often associated
with poor management practices. With the economy and job market improving,
Sales managers will need to take steps to prevent the loss of talented
representatives -- and revenue -- to competing organizations."
The first step in keeping great employees is understanding how they view
their current work experience. Sales professionals say they feel overworked
and under-appreciated. Sixty-nine percent report feeling burnout due to heavy
workloads and 44 percent say they do not feel valued by their companies.
What is also discouraging to these workers is the lack of support from
their direct supervisors. Thirty-one percent of Sales professionals say their
boss does not make time to address their job concerns and 26 percent said
their boss does not help them to develop or improve their skills.
http://www.accountancyage.com
Accountancy Age -
London,UK
19 Apr 2005
Carole Gaskell,
Management Consultancy
This time it's personal: Getting the best from your
people
How management consultancies can benefit from coaching to utilise their best
asset - their staff.
With order books stronger than at any time since 2000 and revenue per consultant
per year up to £188,000, according to the Management Consultancies Association
2003/04 industry report, the industry is no longer in the doldrums. But with
growth come challenges such as keeping hold of clients and growing their
business, retaining talent and enhancing the productivity and work-life balance
of staff. Coaching can help a business meet these challenges by optimising
potential and igniting passion. It's about energising employees and giving
managers the tools and techniques to motivate their staff.
Client relationships
This is the core element of any consultancy firm. A strong, customer
relationship is the foundation for long-term loyalty and sales. Here, coaching
skills have a strong role to play, developing in staff the advanced
interpersonal skills which lead to powerful conversations that drive customer
relationships. Asking the right questions to address salient issues and concerns
including cost, timings or future partnerships is an incredibly important
component of any customer relationship.
Construction giant Bovis Lend Lease came to us to improve its customer
relationships. Its head of learning and development at the time said: 'We wanted
the key people in the business to think in terms of clients not projects, and
examine how best to build profitable customer relationships.' Not only would
employees be expected to keep the client informed on specific projects but also
to listen to what the customer wanted. Through a series of workshops focusing on
the customer, telephone coaching and open feedback, companies can benefit from
more powerful relationships with clients as well as more business opportunities.
Making the best use of talent
We all know how critical staff retention, the war for talent and making best use
of this talent are for management consultancies. By helping develop a supportive
and empowering environment where people can learn and develop, and by aligning
HR practices with coaching to ensure the best people are accelerated through the
ranks, coaching can ensure the right people are in the right jobs at the right
time. Coaching also acts as an important link between management and talented
staff, leading to a greater feeling of collaboration and a more effective way to
identify talent.
Redressing work-life balance
The consultancy industry has a long-hours culture. An unhealthy work-life
balance can lead to nightmare employees, who are physically present but
increasingly unproductive. And employees are becoming more demanding. A recent
Department of Trade and Industry survey found that 78% of employees believe they
should be able to 'balance their work and home lives' as they choose. By
providing people with space to reflect on their work and to face up to personal
barriers, coaching can help employees to realise that, while not everything can
be accomplished, a fresh perspective, clearly defined goals and the right
analysis can make them more productive.
A healthy work-life balance is about having control over what you do and knowing
how to achieve peace of mind. Coaching helps create a culture where staff have
the autonomy to manage, maintain relationships with customers and operate within
an open working environment. The benefits are huge: reduction in staff turnover,
absenteeism and stress-related illnesses, and an increase in motivation,
achievement and personal growth.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com
Seattle
Times - USA
Knight
Ridder Newspapers
By
Candace Goforth
April 3, 2005
Positive feedback helps at work
AKRON, Ohio — It didn't
take a scientist to figure out that grumpy people make others feel lousy and
feeling lousy makes them less productive at work. But, in fact, researchers have
quantified the effect of chronic negativity. And you'd never have guessed how
expensive those scowls can be.
Negativity costs the U.S.
economy $300 billion a year — and researchers consider that a conservative
estimate. Unfortunately, smiles and sunny outlooks can't be mandated in
the company manual. But managers can neutralize and even reverse damaging
negativity through the measured use of employee recognition and praise.
And there's a scientific
formula for that, too, said Tom Rath, global practice leader for strengths-based
development for the Gallup Organization and co-author of "How Full is Your
Bucket? Positive Strategies for Work and Life." Rath wrote the book with his
grandfather, Donald Clifton.
Strategies for a positive workplace
Start by setting an example yourself. Make an effort to have positive exchanges
with others. When you encounter people who are chronically negative and will not
change, avoid interactions with them whenever possible. Shine a light on what's
right: Instead of pointing out weakness and areas where there is room for
improvement, focus on the positive. Individuals are more likely to excel if they
are encouraged in areas where they have talent rather than pushed to improve in
areas where they struggle.
Everyone wants to be with people they like. Cultivating close relationships at
work results in higher productivity, greater employee retention and better
safety records. Give unexpectedly: The most valued gifts aren't always
anticipated. In addition to milestone awards — sales goals, years of service —
reward small accomplishments in a meaningful way. Sometimes the gift of
responsibility is the most meaningful.
"Do unto others as they would have you do unto them." In other words, don't give
one-size-fits all recognition. Customize the reward to the recipient. The
knowledge that you took the time to consider the individual will mean just as
much as the recognition itself. So put away the gold watches, and be creative.
Source: "How Full is Your Bucket? Positive Strategies for Work and Life" by Tom
Rath and Donald O. Clifton
Knight Ridder Newspapers
Clifton died in 2003 and
never saw the book published. He was a psychologist who pioneered the study of
positive psychology and developed the dipper-and-bucket analogy that gives the
book its title. The metaphor goes like this: Everyone has an invisible bucket
that is either filled or emptied with each interaction with another person
(positive exchanges add to the bucket, negative exchanges take from it).
When our buckets are full,
we feel cheerful and spread our positive energy to others. When our buckets are
empty, we are gloomy and send our negative vibe out to the world. In the
business world, that translates to hampered productivity. The book and its
philosophy of cheeriness have topped national best-seller lists and gained the
attention of executives from major corporations, including Hudson, Ohio-based
Jo-Ann Stores.
Rosalind Thompson,
executive vice president of human resources for Jo-Ann Stores, made the book
required reading for the company's regional vice presidents. "We're definitely
attuned to the notion that focusing on someone's strengths and giving
recognition for performance is critical to our success," Thompson said.
Underlying the full-bucket philosophy is the principle of encouraging and
developing employees' strengths, where they have the most potential for
greatness, rather than pushing for improvement in areas of weakness. "Sometimes,
it's not so great to be well-rounded," Rath said. "Those sharp edges can be a
good thing."
Rath pointed to a new
Gallup study, which found that when managers focused on employees' strengths, 61
percent of the employees were engaged in the work and only 1 percent were
actively disengaged — complaining about their jobs, sniping at their co-workers
and bad-mouthing the company. When managers focused on employees' weaknesses,
only 45 percent of the employees were engaged and 22 percent were actively
disengaged.
Rath is the first to admit
that the science of happiness might elicit some eye rolling from certain human
resources hard-liners. "That would have been my initial reaction to this," Rath
said. "I'm not the most bubbly, outgoing guy. That's the reason we tried to
weigh this down with data. No matter how jaded someone may be, if you show how
this affects the bottom line, that draws in a different group."
It isn't easy to apply
science to something as intangible as negativity. But the theory behind Rath's
book is backed by 50 years of Gallup research and scientific studies. This
research suggests a happy, productive work force is dependent on a "magic ratio"
of positive to negative interactions.
Forget the principles you
learned in junior high science class. In this case, one positive does not cancel
out a negative. The magic ratio Rath talks about calls for three positive
interactions for every negative one. That explains why an unpleasant exchange
with a surly co-worker can ruin a perfectly good mood. But, as Rath's charts
show, that surly co-worker is more than just a drain on a work force's
collective psyche, he's a drain on productivity.
A recent Gallup survey
showed that employees who received regular praise and recognition were more
productive, more likely to stay with their employer, received higher
satisfaction scores from customers and had better on-the-job safety records.
So just shower your
workers with unending positive reinforcement, right? Wrong.
Praise can be overdone,
Rath said. Just as researchers have identified the ideal balance of positive and
negative interactions for productivity, they have quantified how many back slaps
are too many. "Too much positive is not grounded in reality, it's not sincere or
deserved," Rath said. "It's seen as just being Pollyanna." According to Rath's
book, praise is excessive when positive-to-negative encounters reach a ratio of
13 to one. Beyond that, praise can come across as insincere. And, Rath said, an
insincere positive interaction can have a more detrimental effect than a
negative one.
Quantity isn't the only
issue. Praise should be deserved, specific and individualized, Rath said. And,
as in Jo-Ann Stores A Cut Above program, it should be spontaneous. Through the
program, any employee can report the great behavior of their co-workers,
supervisors and subordinates. Once approved, the nominee gets a pin in the shape
of a tiny pair of scissors. The pins are presented in a small ceremony, in which
the rewarded employee is told exactly what he or she did right. Thompson said
the pins are coveted throughout the company, and employees display their
personal collections on their suit lapels and fabric-store aprons.
"As we're continuously
improving our (corporate) culture, we're looking at the whole model and how to
work with strengths rather than (weaknesses)," Thompson said. "It's just a more
positive way to think. And when you think positively, you feel better."
Copyright © 2005 The Seattle Times Company
Published in
mysan.de/international
February 2005
Performance Management:
CHAPEL HILL, N.C., Feb. 11 /PRNewswire/ --
The best performance management and measurement tactics not only impact the
bottom-line, but also greatly enhance employee satisfaction. For example, one
company -- benchmarked by leading research & consulting firm Best Practices, LLC
-- instituted an apprentice program to develop employee knowledge across skill
competencies. This program enabled the company to achieve Six Sigma production
quality and a 90% retention rate for employees who participated in the program.
Best Practices’ Global Benchmarking Council provides an in-depth examination of
recent trends in performance management. Some examples include:
-
Another benchmark partner evaluated employee satisfaction through: employee
interviews, surveys, safety performance, turnover rates, crew meetings,
grievance procedures, strikes and personal interaction. Viewing this
integrated picture helped the company to achieve a turnover rate of less than
0.25%.
- One top company measures employee involvement
through the number of requests placed through its open door policy. In the
open door policy, employees write up their concerns and the Employee Relations
Department forwards submissions to the appropriate department for a direct
response within 14 days.
Best Practices’ research also confirmed
that employee engagement and success is a two-way street. Companies need to
define a set of behaviors and ethics that lead employees to success. Employees
then need to do their part by:
- Thinking of themselves as an asset in which
they will continually invest through professional growth activities
- Make themselves visible to their boss and
senior management
- Being accountable for their actions, both
successes and failures
"World class companies realize that their
people are their most valuable asset, and they are making tremendous
improvements in all areas of human resources," said Chris Bogan, president and
CEO of Best Practices, LLC. "These companies are investing billions of dollars
to develop systems that will increase employee retention and overall workforce
morale."
January 25,
2005
Canadian organizations must work harder to
productively engage employees
Watson Wyatt's WorkCanada 2004/2005 survey highlights key areas
employers must address to create an engaged and enabled
workforce to drive productivity --
Canadian organizations are missing a significant
opportunity to gain a competitive advantage through building productive
engagement in the workforce, according to a new survey of employee attitudes
by leading Canadian human capital consultancy Watson Wyatt Canada. The Watson
Wyatt WorkCanada 2004/2005 survey shows employers must work harder to engage
and enable employees to drive productivity and business results.
"In an increasingly competitive environment, it is vitally important that
organizations take full advantage of the considerable potential inherent in
their people," said Graham Dodd, Canadian Practice Leader, Human Capital
Group, Watson Wyatt Canada. "Utilizing a productive engagement model - that
ensures employees are both engaged in and enabled to do their jobs - can
provide organizations a significant competitive advantage, helping to enhance
performance, drive productivity and create maximum value."
One of the largest and most current statistically representative surveys
on employee attitudes in Canada, the WorkCanada 2004/2005 study assesses the
strengths and weaknesses of Canadian employers in the four areas of productive
engagement - alignment, capability, resources and motivation. The results, are
compared to the previous WorkCanada study conducted in 2002 where applicable,
to provide insights into the strategies and practices that can increase
productive engagement. Following are some highlights:
Alignment improving, but work still remains
Alignment - the extent to which employees know what they need to do to
make their organization successful - improved by 14 percentage points between
2002 and 2004, according to the Watson Wyatt survey. Over three-quarters
(76 per cent) of employees said they understand their organizations' business
goals, compared to 62 per cent in 2002. However, four out of 10 employees
(39 per cent) said they do not understand the steps they must take to achieve
these goals.
"While many Canadian organizations have done a good job communicating big
picture messages to employees, they tend not to follow through at the
manager-to-employee level," said Dodd. "Managers and supervisors are vital to
the employer-employee relationship, and they must be better equipped to
communicate on a one-to-one basis with staff in order to clarify and discuss
day-to-day roles and actions."
Motivation: Accountability and performance management continue to be
trouble spots
| 
Toronto
-
Calgary -
Vancouver - Ottawa - Montreal - New York - Rochester - Minneapolis
- Washington DC