Cappelli, P., & Tavis, A. (2016). The performance management revolution: the focus is shifting
from accountability to learning. Harvard Business Review, 94(10).
Since the 2000s, two schools of thought have existed regarding people management: the first centered on the idea that employees are who they are and that employers have to work with a static existence, the second that employees are shaped by an organization that they are responsive to, thus, are malleable. These differing perspectives have implications for performance reviews. In the first school of thought, year-end reviews hold people accountable for past actions through things like financial reward or punishment with raises or bonuses. This, however, by occurring at the end of a year, these reviews occur at the expense of improving current behavior and performance. In a shift towards the second school of thought, the idea that employees are changing and can learn, focuses more on frequent, less formal feedback given in the regular work cycle is more helpful. By focusing on people development, an organization can be attentive to the demand for agility, and the realities that in collaborative work environments, teamwork requires more frequent, real-time reflection. Challenges persist in the newer, malleable model, like aligning individual and company goals, rewarding performance can be tricky, can be a challenge to have the ability to identify poor performers, and discriminatory legal issues persist, and employees can encounter this as a feedback “firehose”.
Having worked within several feedback models, this article accurately summaries the tensions that exist! It offered several reasons why ongoing feedback can add benefit to an organization and its teams, but also reminds me that, when in the position of providing feedback or giving an annual review to be mindful of workflows and information overload. It also helps me feel more comfortable with raising development-centered conversations throughout the year for not only my direct reports, but myself, as well.
LO2: demonstrate the ability to assess complex organizational environment and achieve communication goals.
LO4: apply communication-centered scholarship to strengthen communication effectiveness.
Comments