turning performance feedback into positive employee engagement
TRANSCRIPT
TURNING PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK INTO POSITIVE EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT
Monthly Webinar Series
February 4, 2016
2Topic Agenda
Item Time (min)
Introduction/Why the Topic? 5
Performance Feedback and Employee Engagement
10
The Trend in Performance Appraisals:Some Case Examples
10
Lessons Learned 5
Q&A 5
Norm Baillie-David SVP Engagement - TalentMap
Monica HelgothVP Engagement - Western Region
Agenda
3
15 years in business7,000+ employee engagement surveys since inception1,000,000+ employees surveyed500+ employee engagement surveys annually
Only 1 Focus
TalentMap by the Numbers
4Sample Clients & Benchmark
Award Programs Technology & Engineering Not-for-Profit & Association
Financial Services
Health Sciences
Other
Why the Topic?
PRIORITIZING OPPORTUNITIES: WHERE DOES PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK FALL?
Improving engagement should be focused on dimensions exhibiting a combination of low performance scores and strong drivers
Focusing on the lower dimension scores exclusively may not fully address what is needed to target and improve engagement
“Maintain:Keep doing well”
“Leverage & Expand”
“Medium/ Low priority”
HighPerformance
LowPerformance
Weak Driver ofEngagement
Strong Driver ofEngagement
High need for improvement coupled with powerful drivers of engagementOpportunities
ForImprovement
6
EXAMPLE 1: HIGHEST CLIENT IN BENCHMARK 7
ORGANIZATIONAL VISIONSENIOR LEADERSHIP
IMMEDIATE MANAGEMENT
CLIENT FOCUS
INNOVATION
TEAMWORK
INFORMATION & COM-MUNICATION
WORK/LIFE BALANCEPROFESSIONAL GROWTH
PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK
WORK ENVIRONMENT
COMPENSATION
Strong Engagement
Driver
Weak Engagement
Driver
Worse Than Benchmark
Better Than Benchmark
EXAMPLE CLIENT 2: PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK AS OPPORTUNITY AREA
8
CHANGE MANAGEMENT
ORGANIZATIONAL VISIONSENIOR LEADERSHIP
IMMEDIATE MANAGERMEMBER FOCUS
INNOVATION
TEAMWORKINFORMATION & COM-
MUNICATIONWORK/LIFE BALANCE
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH
PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK
WORK ENVIRONMENT
TOTAL REWARDS
Low Performance
Score
High Perfor-mance Score
Strong Engagement
Driver
Weak Engagement
Driver
271 respondents selected a theme for this comment
How could your performance feedback be improved?
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
39%32%
25%18%
16% 15%7%
Benchmark
% F
requ
ency
PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK: COMMENTS 9
“The performance appraisal process can be improved by bringing back the 5 tiered measurement. No additional pay increase but it really changes the morale of appraisals. As it stands now, you are either in the 90% of workers or the 10% exceptional. If you bring back the middle zone, it will help the morale of those that do work hard.”
“Less negative feedback, balance it with positive feedback. “
“Performance evaluation / feedback is done at the very last minute, right at the deadline. The process has little value. Continuous, less formal feedback would be much better”
EXAMPLE : MORE TYPICAL CLIENT – AVERAGE ENGAGEMENT
10
ORGANIZATIONAL VISION
SENIOR LEADERSHIP
IMMEDIATE MANAGEMENT
CUSTOMER FOCUS
INNOVATION
TEAMWORK
INFORMATION & COM-MUNICATION
WORK/LIFE BALANCE
PROFESSIONAL GROWTH
PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK
WORK ENVIRONMENTCOMPENSATION
Strong Engagement
DriverWeak
Engagement Driver
Worse Than Benchmark
Better Than Benchmark
Not perceived well, but not enough of a driver to focus on as priority
Overall Performance Feedback
I understand how I will be measured or evaluated at work.
My performance evaluation process is fair.
My performance evaluation process helps me to be more productive.
The frequency of my performance evaluation is about right.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
29
26
26
36
29
27
21
34
23
28
45
53
41
42
43
Unfavourable Neutral Favourable
% Frequency
-6 -16
-1 -17
-13 -20
-1 -8
-9 -18
PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK 11
Data is rounded to the nearest whole number* Number indicates % Favourable score +/- CLIENT
2014*+/- TM
Benchmark
Source: TalentMap text analytics
PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK – KEY THEMES
12
Example weak negative:• “It seems like the evaluation process is just a formality…... The periodic one-on-one chats with
my manager are more constructive….Also, often the goals that are set are so far ahead in time that when it comes time to compare accomplishments against the goals list, it just looks bad because the goals weren't met, but it's not like we just sat around twiddling our thumbs, we were working on other stuff (deemed more important by management).”
PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK – SENTIMENT ANALYSIS
13
Strong Positive
Weak Positive
Neutral
Weak Negative
Strong Negative
8
39
6
11
11
Sentiment Rating(number of comments rated)
ENGAGES AND MOTIVATES
• (Very) Frequent feedback
• Informal conversations• Informal recognition• Avoiding rating scales• Conversations focus
more on future, less on past
DISENGAGES AND DISCOURAGES
• Annual review (with few or no conversations)
• Ranking and percentile methods (e.g. top 10%, median, etc.)
• Rating scales which are seen as limiting, arbitrary and/or subjective
• Conversations focus on past performance
• Emphasis on “strengths” and “weaknesses”
SUMMARY: WHAT WORKS, WHAT DOESN’T?
14
HIGHLY ENGAGED ORGANIZATIONS ARE DROPPING THE ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW
15
Source: Quantum Workplace – The State of Employee Feedback
1:1s RANKED #1 COMMUNICATION STRATEGY
16
Source: Quantum Workplace – The State of Employee Feedback
DEVELOPMENTS AND “BEST PRACTICE” EXAMPLES
17
The GE Example
18
Teams and departments were focused on their own objectives – resulting in entrenched siloes
Annual objectives couldn’t keep pace with changing demands
OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS DRIVING CHANGE
19
Remember this?
Managers and their direct reports hold regular, informal “touchpoints” where they set or update priorities that are based on customer needs
Conversations are documented using specialized app (including voice recording – so no extra effort required)
Development is forward looking and ongoing; managers coach rather than critique; suggestions can come from anyone in an employee’s network.
THE GE SOLUTION/APPROACH
20
Source: GE’s Real-Time Performance Developmentby Leonardo Baldassarre and Brian FinkenAugust 12, 2015Harvard Business Review
We’re (also) learning a new vocabulary, dispensing with sticky labels like “strengths” and “weaknesses”.
“We focus instead on behaviors employees may want to “continue” as well as changes they may want to “consider” making. This new vocabulary focuses our teams less on backward looking feedback and more on forward-looking actions. It frames feedback in a positive way.”
“The shift from “command and control” to “empower and inspire” is dramatic, and, as evidenced by our fivefold increase in productivity, it is yielding significant benefits for our employees and customers.”
WHAT THE GE CONVERSATIONS LOOK LIKE:
21
22
“As managers, we need to be more vulnerable and show our teams we are growing to give
them the license to do the same
”
The Deloitte Example
23
Source: Reinventing Performance Managementby Marcus Buckingham and Ashley GoodallHarvard Business Review, April 2015
1. Survey of executives shows 58% don’t believe their current approach drives either engagement, nor performance
2. Existing approach had little impact on future performance (performance rarely changed dramatically)
3. Huge time investment in process (2 million hours per year, for 65,000 employees). • That works out to >30 hours per person per year• Most spent in conversation about rating employees very little time
in conversations with employees.
4. Research shows that performance ratings are more driven by the rater than performance of the ratee.• Source: Michael Mount, Steven Scullen, and Maynard Goff Journal of Applied Psychology, 2000.
OBSERVATIONS DRIVING CHANGE
24
Addressing frequency: The Weekly Check In
Every team leader is to check in with each team member once a week. Not in addition to the work of a team leader; they are the work of a team leader.
Check-ins initiated by the employee/team member, not the leader. Recognizes a simple truth: the team member has more interest in receiving the feedback than the leader has in giving it.
THE DELOITTE SOLUTION
25
Addressing rating bias:Leaders rate each project based on what they would do, not what they think of the person:
1. Given what I know of this person’s performance, and if it were my money, I would award this person the highest possible compensation increase and bonus [measures overall performance and unique value to the organization on a five-point scale from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”].2. Given what I know of this person’s performance, I would always want him or her on my team [measures ability to work well with others on the same five-point scale].3. This person is at risk for low performance [identifies problems that might harm the customer or the team on a yes-or-no basis].4. This person is ready for promotion today[measures potential on a yes-or-no basis].
THE DELOITTE SOLUTION
26
THE LESSONS LEARNED
27
Improving performance feedback and appraisals will improve both engagement and performance
Organizations with high employee engagement “get it” and have intuitively shifted or augmented their approach
Performance feedback and appraisal approaches are evolving towards:
• Greater frequency• Greater emphasis on future development, rather than past
performance• Understanding that rating scales say more about the rater
than the employee
Lessons Learned
28
Event Format Topic DateTalentMap Monthly Webinar Series
Live Webinar Work-life Balance and its Impact on Culture: Confessions of a Reformed Workaholic
February 25, 2016
Conference Board of Canada: Public Sector HR 2016
ConferenceFebruary 23-24, 2016
TalentMap Monthly Webinar Series
Live Webinar Keeping Employees Engaged in a Troubled Economy
March 24, 2016
OMHRA Spring Workshop Conference/Trade Show
April 13, 2016
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology
Spring Conference
April 14-16, 2016
UPCOMING TALENTMAP LEARNING SESSIONS
THANK YOU!QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION
30
Monica HelgothVP Engagement – TalentMap [email protected], x515
Norm Baillie-DavidSVP [email protected], x504
http://www.talentmap.com/webinar-past/