Community » HR Forums » Human Resources » Performance Management» Annual Performance Review - Cycle Change
Annual Performance Review - Cycle Change

Last post December 3, 2019 10:37 AM by debora. 2 repiles.

March 27, 2014 06:32 AM 1
Total Posts: 27
Join Date: April 18, 2009
Rank: Executive
Post Date: December 3, 2019
Posts: 27
Location: India

Annual Performance Review - Cycle Change

Friends,

As a management mandate, we plan to change from our existing system of conducting annual performance reviews on respective date of hire to a similar date for the workforce.

I have been working on this for a long time but wondering how to deal cases involving promotions, transfer etc. that happen during the year? 

Could you please advise.

Thanks in advance

Girdhar
 

March 27, 2014 06:352
sanjibani
Total Posts: 21
Join Date: April 18, 2009
Rank: Executive
Post Date: March 27, 2014
Points: 105
Location: India

Re: Annual Performance Review - Cycle Change

Girdhar, I can truly relate to your situation since I have been through this. This kind of system can get crazy at time in terms of managing on a one-off basis all the time, not to mention the follow-up that needs to be done each time with the line managers... You may want to retro-adjust the increases based on their hire date for synching the review schedule.

November 27, 2019 12:363
debora
Total Posts: 108
Join Date: April 18, 2009
Rank: Leader
Post Date: November 27, 2019
Points: 540
Location: India

Re: Annual Performance Review - Cycle Change

 

The first stage of this per­for­mance man­age­ment cycle is ​plan­ning’, a phase which was tra­di­tion­al­ly car­ried out only once each year. Dur­ing this plan­ning phase, employ­ees are set SMART objectives, which con­tribute to achiev­ing one or more of the company’s goals.

The plan­ning phase also includes the for­ma­tion of a per­son­al devel­op­ment plan (what strengths and skills the employ­ee should devel­op to achieve their goals) and a review of the employee’s job require­ments. The idea is to ensure that the organization's goals and val­ues feed into this plan­ning phase, there­by ensur­ing that indi­vid­ual per­for­mance is aligned with the overall strategy of the organization.

The next stages are ​Act’ and ​Track’, which occur through­out the year. Employ­ees aim to achieve their objec­tives and car­ry out their role effec­tive­ly, while line man­agers coach their employ­ees, track progress, and pro­vide feedback.

His­tor­i­cal­ly, com­pa­nies have placed a large empha­sis on the final stage, ​Review’, often com­bin­ing it with employ­ee per­for­mance rat­ings. The ​Review’ phase tra­di­tion­al­ly encom­pass­es an annu­al per­for­mance review, a meet­ing where employ­ee and man­ag­er dis­cuss and eval­u­ate goal pro­gres­sion and com­ple­tion, per­for­mance issues, train­ing and devel­op­ment, and oppor­tu­ni­ties for advancement.

This once-a-year meet­ing can be extreme­ly stress­ful for both employ­ee and man­ag­er, and ulti­mate­ly unpro­duc­tive. Attempt­ing to dis­cuss and achieve so much in one meet­ing is sim­ply unfea­si­ble and the review fre­quent­ly becomes a tick-the-box exer­cise with lit­tle mean­ing­ful con­ver­sa­tion. Because of the inad­e­qua­cies of this annu­al process, a more agile per­for­mance man­age­ment cycle has been adopt­ed by com­pa­nies around the world, which we’ll look at below.

 

December 3, 2019 10:374
debora
Total Posts: 108
Join Date: April 18, 2009
Rank: Leader
Post Date: December 3, 2019
Points: 540
Location: India

Re: Annual Performance Review - Cycle Change

 HR has consistently heard that spring term and fiscal year-end are challenging time periods for managers to complete all performance evaluation discussions and prepare the formal written evaluations. Despite attempts to move completion deadlines earlier in the calendar year – most recently we moved from June deadlines to March or early April – actual completion dates have tended to slip into late spring or beyond.

While supporting compensation decisions is one way the performance evaluation process is useful, the fiscal year timing of the process can result in hastily prepared evaluations and distract from the intended purposes of performance evaluation discussions and goal setting:
to provide meaningful feedback to employees regarding their job performance;
for managers to receive feedback from employees about their work and goals;
to establish individual goals and objectives for the employee to achieve in the coming year that are tied to departmental and institutional goals and objectives;
to measure progress on previously-established goals and objectives and adjust as necessary; and
to discuss and note professional development or training opportunities that will enhance employees' job performance and career development and prepare employees to take on new projects or assignments.
A longer time period between formal annual evaluations in December/January and merit-based pay recommendations in late spring will enable department evaluations to be completed well in advance of any merit recommendations, and has the following additional benefits:
The late spring discussions managers have with employees prior to recommending any merit pay increases can be in the form of a mid-year or quarterly discussion about progress towards and achievement of previously-established goals, rather than in the context of the formal annual evaluation; and
Employees who may need redirection or correction in priorities or goals will have more time to demonstrate improvement prior to the time merit increase recommendations are due.