4 Most Common Issues in Performance Appraisals

Performance appraisals are essential in every organisation and offer employers and employees many benefits. However, these appraisals have many potential downsides that could do more harm than good.

The following are all the typical problems that result from subpar performance appraisals, common blunders managers make, and solutions to avoid this. Hence, you avoid falling into the same traps as other organisations.

The 4 most common issues with performance appraisals

Performance reviews can result in various problems, many of which are caused by our biases. However, the more conscious we are of these biases, the simpler it is to spot them and stop them from having a detrimental effect.

1. The halo effect

This refers to the procedure whereby an appraiser based their evaluation of an employee solely on one characteristic, such as a personality attribute, physical trait, or prior job experience. For instance, rather than conducting a complete and objective performance assessment, an employer may generalise based on the fact that an employee consistently exceeds performance standards.

This is why it's crucial to carry out reliable evaluations and allow management to examine observable findings that one can't twist through interpretation. 

2. Appraiser bias

Humans are born with prejudices; studies have shown that we rely more on our biases than on evidence and reason when making judgments. It is plausible for the appraiser to develop a bias in favour of or against an employee during the performance appraisal process, whether consciously or unintentionally, which would alter the evaluation's conclusion.

3. Lengthy gaps between appraisals

The prolonged time interval between reviews, which organisations usually do once a year, is another frequent problem with performance appraisals. Employees do not receive continual, immediate feedback on their performance. As a result, some workers may experience frustration or confusion since they are unable to tell whether their performance is becoming better.

4. Lack of acknowledgement

Another primary concern with performance appraisals is that many supervisors focus on the bad rather than the positive. It's crucial to frame feedback in a productive way that includes positive reinforcement and constructive criticism for employees. Their levels of engagement and productivity will increase as a result.

The top three errors management should avoid while appraising a staff member's performance

While performance reviews can improve an employee's experience at work, they frequently have the opposite effect, leaving employees dissatisfied. Managers and the errors they commit throughout the performance review process are often to blame for this.

1. Central tendency

This is when an appraiser assigns employees a grade based on the average of all performance scales. It is frequently done when raters wish to avoid offending employees' sentiments or don't want to over or underrate workers' talents.

This has a negative effect on the data gleaned from these appraisals and leads to an erroneous portrayal of an employee's performance. It will also make it more difficult for management to take proactive, well-informed action.

2. The recency effect

This happens when the individual evaluating the employee's performance concentrates on recent activities or output rather than appraising the entire performance period.

It follows that an excellent performance assessment will only accurately reflect an employee's overall performance over the course of the prior year if they suddenly exhibit strong performance in the weeks or months before the appraisal.

However, a worker who often performs well can see a decline in performance, which might result from circumstances outside their control. As a result, the employee would receive a subpar performance assessment that did not fairly account for the effort they expended throughout the review period.

3. Not communicating with staff after performance appraisals

The mistake that many managers make is not communicating with staff members after performance reviews. Even if the assignment may have been finished, a performance review should result in the creation of goals and action plans for the future. Managers must encourage their staff members so they may accomplish their goals, even though employees should be accountable for their personal development.

How to make performance appraisals more accurate

Although performance appraisals might raise some concerns, you can minimise these mistakes. First and foremost, top management must understand performance management's fundamentals to constructively conduct such assessments.

As we can see from the information above, biases have a detrimental effect on evaluations. 

• Teaching employees about possible biases may help them become more conscious of their behaviour, recognise when prejudice is impairing their judgement, and learn how to minimise biases' negative impacts.

• Utilising all existing resources during the evaluation process is another technique to decrease errors. Management can analyse an employee's performance more objectively by using supporting documents, such as the employee's sales records, and by reducing their reliance on recollection. Additionally, one should use objective standards to gauge an employee's performance.

Once a manager has finished a draught of a performance appraisal, they can send it and any accompanying materials to a colleague for review to make sure they've done an objective evaluation.

For more HR-related content, visit our HR Library!