An employer’s guide to effective performance evaluations

Performance evaluations have traditionally been the go-to tool for providing feedback to employees about their performance. Historically they have been conducted annually by the employee’s supervisor, but recent data has led to questions about their use and effectiveness following this model.

Some have posited that an annual structure and a heavy emphasis on consequent financial reward or punishment result in performance reviews that hold employees accountable for their past behavior rather than emphasizing current performance and talent development. As a result, many employers have abandoned performance reviews in favor of a model of providing immediate and continuous feedback throughout the year.

While business performance may benefit from the emphasis on improvement and growth, this approach may present challenges for HR departments.

Benefits and employer recommendations

One of the primary benefits of conducting performance evaluations is that they can help a company defend itself against claims of discrimination, retaliation, harassment, and wrongful termination. As a result, employers may want to consider a hybrid approach. One such approach is to maintain annual performance reviews while coaching supervisors on providing more immediate feedback and talent development.

Another approach is to conduct performance reviews more often, such as every three months. This provides for more timely feedback, keeping employees more motivated and focused and deemphasizing the often-demoralizing influence of consequences in pay adjustments.

The practice of conducting performance reviews more often can make life easier for the HR department. HR benefits from more timely performance records and may be able to identify any issues or trends not reported or noticed by supervisors because it receives information more regularly. This may allow HR representatives to address issues more quickly, which could save legal headaches. Evaluators conducting performance reviews should be trained on best practices.

Treat all employees equally.

If they are not treated equally, the employer could be subject to discrimination suits based on disparate treatment. An employer or supervisor may not even know whether an employee is a member of a class protected under state or federal law. If employees are treated the same, many claims of disparate treatment can be defended successfully.

Avoid language that reinforces stereotypes.

Utilizing language that supports historical stereotypes may lead to claims of discrimination. Sometimes traditional biases may sneak into an evaluation without the evaluator realizing it. Consider the following examples below.

DON’T: “[Female Employee] is not assertive about approaching her sales leads.”

DO: “[Female Employee] did not meet their sales quota this quarter.”

DON’T: “[Older Employee] is not as energetic as their colleagues.”

DO: “[Older Employee] did not meet their production target this quarter. The numbers are as follows.”

DON’T: “Customer appear put-off by [Male Employee]’s feminine mannerisms.”

DO: “Multiple customers have complained that [Male Employee] got their order wrong, and management confirmed that they were correct.”

DON’T: “[Female African-American Employee] seems to approach customers with a lot of attitude.”

DO: “On this date [Female African-American Employee] screamed an obscenity at a customer. Here is the quote reported by the customer and confirmed by her colleagues.”

Avoid language that could disrupt the at-will employment relationship.

Certain comments may be interpreted as creating a contract for long-term employment. It is important to provide specific examples and evidence when documenting employee behavior or performance issues. This helps to ensure that the feedback is clear and objective. Using vague or subjective language can lead to misunderstandings and disputes.

By focusing on specific incidents and behaviors, both the employee and the employer can have a better understanding of the situation and work towards improvement. Remember to always maintain a professional and respectful tone when addressing performance concerns with employees. This will help to foster a positive and constructive work environment.

DON’T: “[Employee] has a long future with this company.”

DON’T: “If [Employee] continues to perform at this level, they will certainly enjoy job security.”

DON’T: “[Employee] has put themselves on the fast-track this quarter.”

DO: “[Employee] met and exceeded the following performance goals.”

Include objective information.

Evaluations should only include objective information. An evaluator’s opinion will be more difficult to defend against a claim of wrongful termination.

DON’T: “I often feel like [Employee] is not listening to my feedback.”

DO: “On this date I provided feedback to [Employee] that they were performing this task in a dangerous manner and demonstrated how to perform it safely. Employee continued to perform the task in the manner I described as dangerous.”

DON’T: “[Employee] does not seem motivated.”

DO: “[Employee] did not meet this production goal.”

DO: “[Employee] was late for work on the following dates.”

DON’T: “[Employee] is not forthcoming with information.”

DO: “On this date [Employee] did not inform management about the following situation, which needed to be addressed immediately.”

DON’T: “[Employee] is not a team player.”

DO: “[Employee] did not attend the team meetings held on the following dates.”

DO: “[Employee] did not participate in the following group project.”

Don’t sugar-coat.

Again, objective information is crucial in addressing performance issues and defending against wrongful termination claims. Trying to “be nice” may undermine such a defense by contradicting the reasons for the termination. Lastly, providing sugarcoated information to employees prevents them from receiving honest feedback that could help them improve. When employees aren’t challenged to improve, the company misses out on the full potential of its workforce.

DON’T: “[Employee] is an asset to the team, but could do a bit better in the production department.”

DON’T: “[Employee] is a valued member of the production team, but did not contribute quite as much as their colleagues this quarter.”

DO: “[Employee] did not meet the following production quota.”

Key takeaway

When conducted properly, performance evaluations are a valuable tool for an employee, the business, and Human Resources alike. Proper training on best practices can go a long way toward protecting an employer’s interests.