EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT
Reviews Give Clear Direction
Performance Management : A Requirement of Leadership
By Joseph P . Truncale , Ph . D . Contributing Editor
Every so often , The Wall Street Journal runs a special section called “ C-Suite Strategies ”. A recent offering was especially compelling .
The main headline reads : “ The Performance Review is Back ”. My question is this : Where did it go ? And more to the point , why ?
As organizations adjusted to a new way of working during the pandemic , a consensus emerged that doing performance reviews was simply not a priority in this rapidly shifting environment . It ’ s not surprising that supervisors and employees alike enjoyed the hiatus . Research shows that neither are enamored of the process but for different reasons .
Managers aren ’ t comfortable giving feedback that may not be well received . Many don ’ t feel confident in the process , nor in their ability to engage their direct reports in a meaningful discussion about performance and areas of
Managers need training to confidently give a performance review .
Photo : Getty Images / iStockphoto / georgeclerk needed improvement . They may feel especially inadequate at addressing issues related to job related behaviors such as tardiness , lack of respect toward others , and the like .
There are , of course , reasons for this . Among them ( and among the most common problems limiting organizational performance ) is the lack of training and preparation given to supervisors and managers . There is an implied assumption that managers , commonly promoted due to their technical expertise , will simply “ figure out ” how to be supervisors and manager . Some do , most do not . The impact of this lack of managerial skill development can quietly derail any attempt to build a teambased , high-performance culture .
Employees , on the other hand , see the performance review as a perfunctory , “ check-thebox ” requirement that does little to recognize their efforts nor help them improve . Many feel it is done simply to rationalize a pay increase ( or not ). There is a sense of dread as the performance review meeting approaches . The manager ’ s lack of confidence and preparation is fully felt by the employee , resulting in a decidedly uncomfortable session . However , just because something is being done badly does not render it unnecessary .
One of the primary responsibilities of leadership is to provide clear direction for the enterprise and to ensure that team members understand their responsibilities and where they stand performance-wise . Clearly articulated and communicated statements of mission , vision and values are important first steps and set the stage for an effective three-step process for performance measurement .
First , each team member should have a list of job responsibilities , plainly written and prioritized in order of impact on the success of the plan ( if everything is a priority , nothing is ). Note that this is not a job description , but a carefully created compilation of areas that must be addressed by the team member over the coming term . This is discussed one-on-one between the manager and the employee ensuring these are understood and agreed upon .
These should align with the organization ’ s mission .
Next , each employee should have succinct , clearly stated , and measurable goals which are reasonable and provide a meaningful challenge . And measurable means numbers ! This is important for several reasons , among them these two . First , there is only one absolute way to understand whether a goal has been reached , exceeded , or missed and that is to put a number to it . Easier for some positions than others , for sure . But doable and mandatory for all . Second , there are people who tend to shy away from the absolute accountability that measurable goals ensure . Best to know this in advance and act accordingly . These goals reflect the company ’ s vision . Finally , identifiable , observable behavior standards are agreed upon , closely monitored , and evaluated . As often as not , employees are fired not for substandard performance but for behavioral issues . Yet , these are often overlooked in the performance review . How we conduct ourselves matters . These emanate from the organization ’ s values . The temptation to shelve a broken process is understandable . Organizations that rise above this by implementing a dynamic performance evaluation system can create a sustainable competitive advantage that sets them apart from the competition .
Joseph P . Truncale , Ph . D ., CAE , is the Founder & Principal of Alexander Joseph Associates , a privately held consultancy specializing in executive business advisory services .
He is the former CEO of the Public Relations Society of America ( PRSA ), the world ’ s largest public relations organization . Prior to joining PRSA , Joe was President & CEO of NAPL , a business management association representing leading companies in the printing , graphic communications , mailing , fulfillment and marketing services industry .
Joe specializes in strategy , customer analysis and organizational effectiveness .
He is a graduate of Monmouth University and he holds a Masters ’ Degree from Rutgers University . In 2011 , he earned his Ph . D . in Media , Culture and Communications at New York University and was the recipient of the Prism Award for Academic Achievement . His dissertation was a ground-breaking study of the leadership styles of highly successful entrepreneurial business executives in the graphic communications industry .
Joe served as Co-Chair of the New York University Board of Advisors and is an adjunct faculty member at NYU teaching graduate courses in Executive Leadership , Financial Management and Analysis , Finance for Marketing Decisions , and Leadership : The C Suite Perspective . He resides in Colts Neck , NJ .
32 COMMERCE www . commercemagnj . com