Clear Review has joined Advanced - Discover our full suite of powerful and innovative people management solutions

Find out more
Back to blog

What's stopping you from changing your current approach to performance management?

Whats stopping you video

Part 1: Per­for­mance Man­age­ment: Why is it rel­e­vant again?

Part 2: What is replac­ing SMART goals in suc­cess­ful organisations?

Part 3: What’s stop­ping you from chang­ing how you do per­for­mance management?

Being upfront about the rea­sons that can stop per­for­mance devel­op­ment from work­ing is impor­tant. This list is not exhaus­tive but cap­tures some of the more com­mon rea­sons, espe­cial­ly for man­agers who involved in the process: 

I’m too busy

Annu­al appraisals have his­tor­i­cal­ly been known to take a lot of time and because every­one in the team is nor­mal­ly seen around the same time, it cre­ates a glut of work. A move to fre­quent and infor­mal con­ver­sa­tions ends up sav­ing time in the long run. It requires less plan­ning, less form fill­ing, and because you’re speak­ing more often, it leads to bet­ter and quick­er deci­sions and to devel­op­ment needs being dealt with more effec­tive­ly. Although it may take time whilst you’re get­ting used to it, the aim should be to make check-ins and feed­back part of the day job, so it becomes more nat­ur­al and nor­mal, and less of a project. 

I’m wor­ried it will impact our relationship

Hav­ing a good rela­tion­ship with your team is a very good thing to aspire to, but that does­n’t mean always keep­ing things light. A healthy rela­tion­ship is one that has open com­mu­ni­ca­tion, not hid­den frus­tra­tions. Talk­ing about per­for­mance in any respect whether it’s about strengths or areas for improve­ment can deep­en and strength­en the rela­tion­ship. Deliv­ered with com­pas­sion and sin­cer­i­ty, these con­ver­sa­tions impact rela­tion­ships for the bet­ter. Things may feel awk­ward and uncom­fort­able ini­tial­ly but as trust builds, that will fade and it’s fine.

Three questions to kick start your performance management revolution

My past expe­ri­ences have put me off

Man­agers and employ­ees alike may be cyn­i­cal about per­for­mance devel­op­ment work­ing. Most of us have had bad or dis­ap­point­ing expe­ri­ences of per­for­mance man­age­ment with: 

  • Time-con­sum­ing paper­work, or paper­work being left incom­plete — so employ­ees aren’t clear about what they need to do
  • Notes not tru­ly reflect­ing per­for­mance con­ver­sa­tions lead­ing to confusion 
  • Goals not being clear­ly defined
  • Employ­ees not mak­ing lit­tle or no progress against goals
  • Employ­ees not get­ting the sup­port or oppor­tu­ni­ties they need to deliv­er goals
  • Saved up crit­i­cal feed­back becom­ing the focus of per­for­mance conversations 
  • Rat­ing and pay deci­sions dom­i­nat­ing conversations
  • Meet­ings going on too long and not reach­ing a conclusion
  • Review­ers com­ments not being added lead­ing to employ­ee frustration/​disengagement

As per­for­mance devel­op­ment is now about more reg­u­lar and brief con­ver­sa­tions that form part of day to day work­ing, many of these issues become irrel­e­vant as the new process nudges man­agers and employ­ees to do things differently.

It’s not my job

The role of the man­ag­er is cen­tral to per­for­mance devel­op­ment work­ing, espe­cial­ly as the major­i­ty of an employ­ees learn­ing and devel­op­ment takes place on the job. This is through new chal­lenges and devel­op­men­tal assign­ments, real-time feed­back, men­tor­ing and coach­ing. There­fore, man­agers must recog­nise the cen­tral role they play in devel­op­ing the team, see­ing it as an inte­gral part of their role. 

It’s not a nice thing to do

Giv­en its his­toric link to under­per­for­mance cas­es, the man­age­ment of legal risk, and the deliv­ery of dif­fi­cult feed­back, per­for­mance man­age­ment can often be seen as a neg­a­tive process. That’s why it’s impor­tant to sep­a­rate cor­rec­tive action process­es, where some­one is per­sis­tent­ly under­per­form­ing, from more future-focused and pos­i­tive per­for­mance devel­op­ment con­ver­sa­tions. Also call­ing it per­for­mance devel­op­ment helps as it removes the stig­ma that has now become asso­ci­at­ed with the term per­for­mance management. 

I can’t let go

Some man­agers feel the need to man­age close­ly. It often hap­pens when they believe that giv­ing peo­ple free­dom over their work could bring inef­fi­cien­cy or risk. When peo­ple are empow­ered to make their own deci­sions, they nat­u­ral­ly feel more moti­vat­ed, as auton­o­my is a basic psy­cho­log­i­cal need. The expe­ri­ence of choice is inher­ent­ly ener­gis­ing and fun­da­men­tal to psy­cho­log­i­cal well­be­ing, it is also piv­otal to suc­ceed­ing at goals. 

Lim­it­ing people’s auton­o­my cre­ates a cycle of depen­dence that pre­vents employ­ees from tak­ing a proac­tive approach to their work. When man­agers attempt to con­trol too much, their employ­ees can become over-depen­dent and end up lack­ing the abil­i­ty to make their own deci­sions. Through man­agers giv­ing oth­ers more respon­si­bil­i­ty and using a coach­ing approach to guide the team through their work, employ­ees can take more ownership. 

There is too much focus on what’s not working

Some­times man­agers and employ­ees can be so focused on deal­ing with what’s not work­ing that it mud­dies what is going well. Some man­agers can be uncom­fort­able giv­ing praise and see it as a cheer­lead­ing’ exer­cise that doesn’t sit com­fort­ably with them. Oth­er man­agers may see that too much pos­i­tive feed­back could affect an employee’s ego or could make them believe that they will get a big­ger pay rise or a promotion. 

Giv­ing pos­i­tive feed­back and recog­ni­tion shouldn’t be about ego-stroking and cer­tain­ly shouldn’t be used as the only indi­ca­tor of pay or pro­mo­tion deci­sions. Employ­ees need the psy­cho­log­i­cal fuel to feel engaged and to per­form and be recog­nised for our efforts con­tributes towards that. If we don’t feel we are deliv­er­ing com­pe­tent­ly in work, we will often seek that ful­fil­ment out­side of works which shifts our ener­gy, and our engage­ment levels. 

Through hav­ing more reg­u­lar con­ver­sa­tions that will allow more reg­u­lar oppor­tu­ni­ty for pos­i­tive recog­ni­tion as well as feed­back that teach­es peo­ple to focus their efforts in oth­er ways, it cre­ates more bal­ance and moves away from too much course correction. 

Man­agers can take their senior­i­ty for granted 

Many man­agers hold posi­tions of sta­tus and are reg­u­lar­ly on the receiv­ing end of admi­ra­tion and respect. It is nat­ur­al for them to take these ben­e­fits for grant­ed, for­get­ting that less senior employ­ees rarely expe­ri­ence the same lev­el of glo­ry. Giv­ing cred­it to oth­ers is not only an essen­tial part of a manager’s role, it builds their rep­u­ta­tions. Peo­ple like peo­ple who com­pli­ment them and see them as less selfish. 

Giv­ing group feed­back can be an eas­i­er option

Although it’s impor­tant to recog­nise group efforts when every­one in the team has made a val­ued con­tri­bu­tion, when under­served pos­i­tive feed­back is giv­en, it can be demor­al­is­ing to oth­er team mem­bers. When every­one is giv­en the same degree of recog­ni­tion, regard­less of effort, employ­ees can often become dis­en­gaged. This is why it’s impor­tant to recog­nise and give feed­back on indi­vid­ual effort, whether this be more pub­li­cal­ly or on a one to one basis.

We wait until the end of a project

It can be eas­i­er to tie feed­back to the end of a project or activ­i­ty but by using time­lines to con­trol the flow of feed­back, it can feel as though the feed­back is being giv­en because it has to be. It also miss­es the oppor­tu­ni­ty for real-time learn­ings through­out the dura­tion of the work. 

Oth­er peo­ple don’t give feedback

While a manager’s feed­back can ful­fil our need for com­pe­tence, the feed­back of team­mates and oth­er man­agers can help employ­ees to feel both com­pe­tent and con­nect­ed. As a man­ag­er, the more peer-to-peer recog­ni­tion you can inspire, the eas­i­er it is to main­tain engagement. 

As a man­ag­er, you can lead the way by mak­ing it a habit to pub­licly recog­nise employ­ees and through seek­ing out feed­back about the team and encour­ag­ing oth­ers to do the same. You can also lis­ten when a team­mate, cus­tomer or oth­er man­ag­er men­tions how much a col­league con­tributed and encour­age them to give the feed­back directly.

Coach­ing can be hard

Coach­ing (ask­ing ques­tions that lead to peo­ple achiev­ing new insights) requires a longer-term mind­set which sees the val­ue of devel­op­ing capa­bil­i­ty and own­er­ship in oth­ers. It also requires empa­thy, curios­i­ty, the abil­i­ty to recog­nise and build on strengths and to remain non-judg­men­tal and objec­tive. These aren’t nat­ur­al skills for most man­agers and need to be devel­oped, and the best way of devel­op­ing is by prac­tis­ing. A good start­ing point is to notice how you behave when you’re hav­ing per­for­mance con­ver­sa­tions and iden­ti­fy one or two areas for improvement. 

We think high per­form­ers don’t need support

Often man­agers focus the great­est amount of effort on the peo­ple who need the most sup­port. It can lead to those who per­form well get­ting neglect­ed and over­loaded. Regard­less of whether an employ­ee already per­forms well, real-time feed­back and check-ins are impor­tant to stay con­nect­ed, to build rela­tion­ships, and to make sure every­one is get­ting what they need to perform. 

As an employ­ee who is per­form­ing well, they may feel com­pe­tent and able with­out addi­tion­al input but even the best per­form­ing and most able employ­ees can ben­e­fit with feed­back, under­stand­ing their strengths, and hav­ing some­one to sup­port their development.

We’re not in the mood

Moods can impact a manager’s abil­i­ty to have a good qual­i­ty con­ver­sa­tion with an employ­ee about how they’re doing and can influ­ence how they deliv­er feed­back. This is the same for employ­ees hear­ing crit­i­cal feed­back. If we’re hav­ing a tough day or we’re stressed, we are more like­ly to be defen­sive. Before hav­ing con­ver­sa­tions about feed­back or progress, it’s there­fore impor­tant to con­sid­er the mood we’re in and how it may impact the con­ver­sa­tion. Through becom­ing aware and through giv­ing some thought to how we want the con­ver­sa­tion to go, in a pos­i­tive way, we are more like­ly to achieve bet­ter outcomes. 

We suf­fer from a fixed mindset

Peo­ple with a fixed” mind­set avoid dif­fi­cult tasks, fear­ing that fail­ure might expose a lack in abil­i­ty. Mean­while, peo­ple with a growth” mind­set rel­ish new chal­lenges and view set­backs as oppor­tu­ni­ties to learn. Unsur­pris­ing­ly, peo­ple with a growth” mind­set dis­play bet­ter self-esteem, more resilience, and enjoy bet­ter out­comes in life.

This is why devel­op­ing a growth mind­set is impor­tant for man­agers and when we know our peo­ple can learn and devel­op, we are more like­ly to sup­port them. It’s the same for employ­ees as a growth mind­set helps you to more pos­i­tive­ly receive devel­op­men­tal feed­back and makes us more like­ly to want to stretch our­selves, know­ing that extra efforts and focus will help us to improve. 

Fixed mind­set peo­ple can often think the world needs to change, not them. For some employ­ees, this means not want­i­ng to set goals and not lis­ten­ing to feed­back. There can be many moti­va­tors for this stance includ­ing the fear of fail­ure or a lack of engagement. 

We focus on what’s hap­pened lately

We can often see per­for­mance as bina­ry, so we’re either doing well or not or some­one is either per­form­ing or they are not. Often, when peo­ple are doing a good job we see them as a high per­former and when they do less well, we see them less pos­i­tive­ly. This doesn’t paint a round­ed pic­ture and doesn’t reflect the fact that we are human and have good and bad days and strengths and areas for improvement.

There is a ten­den­cy for peo­ple to focus on what’s hap­pened late­ly” when eval­u­at­ing or judg­ing some­thing and to weight what some­one has done in recent weeks or months, rather than look­ing at their per­for­mance as a whole — this is often referred to as recen­cy bias. 

We pre­sume peo­ple know how they’re doing

Research tells us that peo­ple are not good at esti­mat­ing their abil­i­ties. Peo­ple with a growth mind­set tend to be more accu­rate which is like­ly to be because they are open to accu­rate infor­ma­tion about their cur­rent abil­i­ties, even when it’s unflat­ter­ing. Also, when you like to learn, you need accu­rate infor­ma­tion about your cur­rent abil­i­ties in order to learn effec­tive­ly, and so you seek more feed­back. Peo­ple with a fixed mind­set will often dis­tort, mag­ni­fy or explain away the feed­back they receive if it goes against their own self-view. These peo­ple can, there­fore, be more dif­fi­cult to give feed­back to. When every­one under­stands that a growth mind­set is encour­aged and that only through under­stand­ing where we are doing well and where improve­ment is need­ed, can tru­ly opti­mise our performance. 

We are too humble

Although it’s impor­tant for man­agers to show humil­i­ty, there is a point when humil­i­ty can drift into an actu­al or per­ceived lack of con­fi­dence (whether oth­ers recog­nise this or not). This becomes a prob­lem when it comes to man­agers giv­ing employ­ees less pos­i­tive feed­back or sug­gest­ing areas for devel­op­ment. It can also affect our abil­i­ty to give pos­i­tive feed­back, as we may feel unwor­thy to cri­tique the per­for­mance of oth­ers — regard­less of the type of feed­back we need to give. 

If a man­ag­er doesn’t believe they have the expe­ri­ence, abil­i­ty, or influ­ence to devel­op oth­ers, it can stop them from giv­ing peo­ple the nec­es­sary sup­port. All man­agers need to under­stand that it is with­in their remit to devel­op their peo­ple and to help them to per­form. The extends to feed­back and goal set­ting and where employ­ees don’t respond well to a manager’s involve­ment, an open con­ver­sa­tion should take place to under­stand why the employ­ee is being affected. 

Three questions to kick start your performance management revolution

We focus too much on per­for­mance and delivery

Man­agers and employ­ee con­ver­sa­tions are often focused on task deliv­ery and get­ting things done which means putting time aside to dis­cuss goal set­ting and indi­vid­ual devel­op­ment can be over­looked. Yet we know that when peo­ple feel they are pro­gress­ing and devel­op­ing, it is moti­va­tion­al and peo­ple are more like­ly to be engaged and stay in their roles. This means both types of con­ver­sa­tions are impor­tant for good lev­els of performance. 

We find feed­back uncomfortable

Many man­agers avoid what they per­ceive as uncom­fort­able con­ver­sa­tions espe­cial­ly if they think an employ­ee will have a con­flict­ing view of the feed­back they have received. Even though man­agers are more than capa­ble to have the con­ver­sa­tion, for some this requires step­ping up and being coura­geous even when they are wor­ried about how to say what they know needs saying.

Kim Scott cre­at­ed the rad­i­cal can­dor frame­work. She says feed­back is eas­i­er to give when it’s seen as guid­ance. In order to pro­vide guid­ance, there are two impor­tant con­sid­er­a­tions. The first is car­ing per­son­al­ly about the per­son you’re giv­ing feed­back to. The sec­ond is the abil­i­ty to be clear and direct. 

We often fall into what’s called The Dra­ma Tri­an­gle’ when build­ing up to and giv­ing feed­back. In the tri­an­gle, there are three roles that peo­ple can play, per­se­cu­tor, res­cuer and vic­tim. When we go into a crit­i­cal feed­back sit­u­a­tion as the per­se­cu­tor, we often force the receiv­er of the feed­back into vic­tim mode, mak­ing them defen­sive and feel­ing as though they have lim­it­ed con­trol of the sit­u­a­tion. Man­agers can also often feel they then need to res­cue the employ­ee if they see them becom­ing emo­tion­al and will soft­en the blow of any feed­back to make it eas­i­er to hear.

The key is to for both man­ag­er and employ­ee to remain in adult (which removes the need to play any of the three roles in the dra­ma tri­an­gle). This means hav­ing grown-up con­ver­sa­tions based on hon­est and fac­tu­al obser­va­tions that can be ratio­nal­ly dis­cussed — oth­ers refer to this as real talk. To do this, employ­ees must feel safe and sup­port­ed and man­agers must avoid using accu­sa­tions or per­son­al attacks.

My direct report used to be my peer 

This is increas­ing­ly com­mon and requires the man­ag­er to hon­est­ly and open­ly rede­fine the bound­aries of the rela­tion­ship and their expec­ta­tions. It’s best to have an open con­ver­sa­tion about the dynam­ics of the rela­tion­ship, how it’s shift­ed and how both par­ties are going to oper­ate in this new rela­tion­ship. Often by sim­ply open­ing up the con­ver­sa­tion and giv­ing the oppor­tu­ni­ty for any con­cerns to be aired, it removes any con­fu­sion or dif­fi­cul­ties that may arise in the future. 

I don’t know what I’m doing

If you haven’t expe­ri­enced per­for­mance devel­op­ment before, you’re bound to be anx­ious about get­ting it right. Most of us take a while to get used to new things and as with any­thing, this will require prac­tice. The best way to get bet­ter is just to get start­ed. The Clear Review sys­tem will by keep­ing every­one organ­ised and remind­ing them of what to do. 

There’s a lot to organise

The Clear Review sys­tem makes sched­ul­ing, remem­ber­ing and cap­tur­ing per­for­mance con­ver­sa­tions and feed­back easy. It also means that all infor­ma­tion is in one place and can be accessed at any time by the man­ag­er and employ­ee. Feed­back can also be giv­en by oth­ers around the organ­i­sa­tion using the sys­tem. Man­agers and employ­ees should come pre­pared for check-ins to get the most out of them but as they are quick and infor­mal, this shouldn’t take long.

Three questions to kick start your performance management revolution