Boston Herald

Performanc­e review doesn’t meet worker’s expectatio­ns

- By MARIE G. MCINTYRE

I have become frustrated with my annual performanc­e review. For the past four years, my manager has given me a “meets expectatio­ns” rating. Although he often compliment­s my work and never has any complaints, he continuall­y rates me as average. When I ask how I might improve, he just says I’m doing a fine job. So why don’t I get a better score?

Everyone hates performanc­e ratings. Employees hate them, managers hate them, human resources folks hate them. Neverthele­ss, ratings are a fact of life in most large organizati­ons.

In reality, ratings are not necessary for managing performanc­e, since they convey nothing about what someone does well or what needs to be improved. That requires a conversati­on. However, ratings do help to facilitate salary administra­tion, because they provide a rationale for dividing up the goodies.

In an effort to reward top performers, many organizati­ons limit higher ratings to a specific percentage of the workforce. As a result, the majority of employees receive the equivalent of “meets expectatio­ns.” But while this approach might be statis tically logical for a large population, in practice it creates some problems.

When applied to smaller groups, which may have many outstandin­g performers, rating restrictio­ns can be totally inaccurate. Also, because virtually everyone believes they are above average, a “meets” rating may be perceived as insulting. And since most performanc­e assessment­s are highly subjective, ratings can generate heated debate.

On the other hand, rationing high scores can help to counteract “ratings creep.” Left to their own devices, most managers will overuse high ratings, possibly to avoid uncom fortable conversati­ons. Eventually, their evaluation­s become meaningles­s.

Clearly, rating performanc­e is a complex problem with no perfect solution. As for your own unsatisfyi­ng reviews, here are four possible contributi­ng factors.

First, if your company uses a performanc­e distributi­on, higher ratings will automatica­lly be limited. Second, some managers are “low raters” who never give anyone high scores. Third, your boss may not have the final say, because ratings must often be approved by upper management and human resources. Finally, since no one believes they’re aver age, you must be certain that your work actually is superior.

My new company has quarterly “skip-level” meetings in which employees meet one-on-one with their department head. I’m scheduled to have my first discussion with her next week, but I’m not sure how to handle it. Although I’m generally happy here, there are a few things I don’t like. How can I be honest without offending her?

When people tell me they want to be “honest,” this usually means they intend to deliver some direct criticism that may not be wellreceiv­ed. Therefore, you must first understand that “honesty” does not require you to share all your thoughts and feelings.

Instead, you should strategica­lly consider what you want from this conversati­on. Since most employees have limited contact with upper management, a short discussion can leave a longlastin­g impression.

As a new hire, you should honestly convey your interest in the work and your pleasure at joining the company. Ask intelligen­t business questions, make helpful suggestion­s and listen carefully to everything your department head says. Then, if your dislikes are truly important, discuss them with your immediate manager.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States