Would you recommend your organization’s performance management approach? If you inadvertently shrugged, you’re not alone! In a survey of over 1,000 organizations, Bersin’s recent High-Impact Performance Management study found that performance management (PM) is the most universally hated people process.1 The Net Promotor Score2 of PM is -60, making just about every other process look better—even with inglorious competing scores like -15 for total rewards. The wake-up call is clear, and most organizations have either already begun a transformation journey or are embarking on it in the near future. But have we paused to think what reinventing, redesigning, and reimagining actually mean?
Insights from IMPACT posted on April 17, 2019
Over the last 20 years, organizations have redesigned, reworked, and revamped performance management time and time again. They’ve tried different rating models, feedback tools, manager coaching, recognition programs, continuous performance management, and more. But in 2019, the debate about what works best still rages.
Performance management (PM) can be an unpopular topic at every level of the workforce. Mention “performance evaluation” or “performance reviews” in any meeting and watch the collective eye-roll as people think of the dreaded year-end process, full of bureaucratic activities like ratings and form-filling reviews, often with lackluster results.
As Bersin’s™ recent High-Impact Performance research indicates, the discipline of performance management is in the midst of deep and fundamental changes.1 As this evolution has moved from the halls of HR, to the C-suite, to the popular press, and the forefront of many employees’ minds, we’ve noticed that a couple of key terms have come to be used interchangeably along the way—specifically, ratings and rankings. This blog offers a quick perspective on how Bersin uses these terms and why we think it is important to distinguish between the two.
No one likes traditional performance ratings very much. Most people ﬁnd the rating process opaque and question its objectivity and fairness. Managers don’t want to spend their time shoehorning people into fixed categories, defending their choices, and communicating ratings that disappoint more often than they thrill. Even HR doesn’t like ratings very much, as the process often involves chasing down managers to complete ratings and enforce guidelines. To respond to this, 14 percent of organizations we surveyed have gone “ratingless,” abandoning performance ratings altogether.1
Posted by Kathi Enderes on November 12, 2018.
“Science confirms: people are not pets,” claims a recent article.1 The key finding of this piece was also the topic of the book Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us, by Daniel H. Pink,2 which asserts that people cannot bribe others into doing what they want. Study after study has confirmed that attempts to motivate people with extrinsic rewards to perform better, work harder, or behave differently tend to be fruitless at best—and are often counterproductive. So why do so many organizations still use the old “pay for performance” moniker? Why do they spend hours and hours designing systems to evaluate performance and differentiate performance levels with rewards?
Posted by Kathi Enderes on October 16, 2018.
Performance management—or the abandonment of it—is a hot topic. We just launched the results of a new High-Impact Performance Management study—the results of surveying over 1,000 organizations globally, across all industries, geographies, and sizes. Many organizations feel old-fashioned and left behind in their approaches to performance management, apologizing if they have not evolved from traditional ratings or performance reviews. Yet organizations still need to make people-related decisions, and individuals need fact-based input to understand current performance and gauge development opportunities. The absence of relevant data often creates a vacuum, leaving individuals confused and organizations open to bias, subjectivity, and misinterpretation. We delved deeper into this topic in our High-Impact Performance Management study.
Posted by Kathi Enderes on October 16, 2018.
In the blog “Merging Performance Management and People Analytics,” I wrote about how combining performance management and people analytics can lead to better and more frequent data for making people decisions and evaluating performance, as well as the opportunity to embed both performance management and people analytics into the flow of work itself. Bersin research shows that combining these entities can drive increased business and workforce performance.1 The performance management software vendor Reflektive, for example, effectively integrated its performance management and people analytics efforts.2
Posted by Kathi Enderes on September 24, 2018.
Performance reviews are dead! Long live performance reviews!
This sums up the last few years’ heated discussion around reviews, ratings, and performance management (PM). I was excited by the opportunity to lead a broad industry study regarding performance management as my first priority with Bersin. I have been working on this topic for the last 20 years: in management consulting for Fortune 50 companies, as a practitioner in large organizations, and most recently in my research here at Bersin.
Posted by Kathi Enderes on September 20, 2018.
The HR tech market is almost as hot as Las Vegas in September. This year’s HR Tech conference was one of the biggest ever in regard to solution providers, corporate buyers, consultants, thought leaders and analysts—and even a fair amount of venture capitalists ready to place their bets. The venue, a large hotel and casino on the Las Vegas Strip, was an appropriate place for anyone looking to wager their chips on a winning solution.