What to Say When Addressing a Performance Issue

The traditional method of providing constructive criticism/feedback would sound something like this:

"John, we need to talk about how things are going. You made some careless errors on the last several reports you handed in. You factored in the production labor costs incorrectly. I had to get other staff to rerun the numbers and as a result Tammy had to drop her own work to fix the mistakes you made. Now I feel I need to go through your month end reports with a fine tooth comb before I pass them onto the CFO, etc....".

Or

"Ann, we need to have a discussion to clarify your role and responsibilities. I've noticed the following issues: You are missing deadlines, not keeping people in the loop when deadlines are not going to be met and not demonstrating a sense of urgency to get the press releases out on time. From my perspective it appears that you don't have good time management skills based on not accomplishing key tasks within specified timeframes. On top of all this your attitude seems really lax when you do miss deadlines. What is going on with you?..."

What the manager has said in the examples above seems accurate. Most managers have been taught to create a bullet-proof case revolving around a list of the employee's shortcomings. After all, you have to prove to the employee that they are underperforming. Is it any wonder that most feedback recipients get defensive and feedback providers find difficultly in achieving anything remotely resembling a productive outcome, never mind gaining agreement on what needs to change?

THROUGH THE EYES OF THE EMPLOYEE
Can you think back to a time when a manager talked to you about a performance issue and did so without any finesse at all? From the employee's perspective when their manager does initiate a performance discussion it can come across as finger pointing, fault finding and disciplinary. Poorly crafted and delivered messages can trigger feelings of self-doubt and worthlessness for the employee. This is particularly true if this is the first time the employee is hearing the information. The traditional approach to giving feedback often comes across in a harsh, "this is what is wrong with you" tone.

Expect a Defensive Reaction
Once employees are confronted with this type of information the natural response is to blame others, fixate on the details, make excuses, try to explain why the feedback is incorrect, etc. All of this adds up to an uncomfortable and often confrontational exchange between the manager and employee. Once a manager has been through this process once or twice it becomes easier to just avoid addressing employee performance issues altogether. Let's just say there is no real mystery for why managers tend to steer clear of giving feedback and why employees don't like being on the receiving end! The fact of the matter is that there is a better way to introduce feedback to employees.

The key is to use words to describe what you want to have happen. 
I'm not sure where this quote originates so I cannot provide the proper credit, but I thought it was impactful: "A good leader can describe what successful performance looks like".  If you are familiar with Marshall Goldsmith's work you're likely familiar with the term "feedforward", which means describing what you want to see for future.  See this short video, How to Begin a Performance Conversation (and how not to), for specific language to introduce feedback in a helpful coaching type style. 

Two Important Questions to Ask During Your Performance Review

I continually hear from employees who have just had their performance evaluation that it wasn't a valuable developmental experience. I then ask, "Did you learn what you do well and should continue doing and find out at least one thing you could be doing that would help you be more effective"? About 10% will answer yes to that question.

Formal Reviews Don't Always Surface the Most Important Information
Part of the problem is that most managers will avoid discussing performance issues that are related to behavior. It's more comfortable to talk about tangible job responsibilities, skills and goals. There may be a critical issue that is never brought up because the manager is afraid of your reaction or may lack the ability to translate it into a the right words.

When it comes right down to it you should be walking away with at least one clearly defined key developmental area needing additional focus.

An All Too Common Story
An employee approached me after one of my all employee workshops on how to ask for feedback to tell me this story. He had a rough time with his 2009 performance review. There were many things he needed to work on. About 4 months into the new performance cycle and diligently working to improve he asked his boss, "So, have you seen any progress, how do you think I'm doing?" His boss said, "You're doing better". End of conversation. Fast forward to 8 months later; time for the 2010 review. The employee said he was worried about another bad review. Of course he is. He received zero valuable feedback from his boss about what he was on track with and what needed additional focus.

If You Really Want to Know
If you really want to know where you stand here is my advice for how to get the most out of your performance evaluation.

Ask two key questions:
I'm really interested in what I should keep doing and that one thing that will help me be more effective in my role:

1. "Tell me one thing I'm doing well and should continue with."

2. "Tell me one thing that I could do that will help me be more effective."

What you are doing when you ask the "tell me the one thing that will help me be more effective" question is giving the feedback provider your permission to share what they otherwise might not feel comfortable talking about. Notice I didn't ask, "tell me about my greatest weakness". Why; because I don't want to hear about my deficiencies. I want to know what I can be doing for future. Phrasing the question to be future focused makes it more comfortable for your boss to be honest about what he/she really wants from you.

Final Point
Ask these two questions more than just once per year.  Ask monthly or quarterly or whenever you feel you need the information.  That way you have time to work on any areas for development well in advance of a formal review.  Equally important, you will know what you are doing well and build greater confidence.  

 

How to Conduct a Talent Review

There are many ways to conduct a talent review.  Performance reviews, the 9 box (measuring performance and potential) and forced rankings to name a few.  I like using the Employee Performance Continuum because it represents a visual model for assessing talent and the brain prefers to think in pictures. 

How is this different from the 9 box? 
I address this because many in the HR and Organizational Development space are familiar with the 9 box which measures both Performance and Potential.  The Employee Performance Continuum which is 4 boxes breaks Performance down into two components:  the WHAT and the HOW. 

Measure the What and the How
The Performance Continuum allows you to measure both Job Competence which represents what gets done (job responsibilities, skills and goal attainment) alongside Behaviors which represent how the person conducts themselves in your work environment.  Ideally we want to attract and retain team members who are both highly accomplished in terms of their ability to do the work plus exhibit the right behaviors. 

Plot the Employee
With a dot or initial indicate where each employee on your team is on the model.  Unsure?  Ask another trusted advisor, a peer or someone at a more senior level, where they see the employee.  People experience others in various ways.  For example, an internal customer might have an entirely different view of the individual.  Talk it through by having a conversation about how the employee's performance contributions are viewed. 

Current and Planned Positions
To maximize a review of your talent indicate where employees are currently and where you need them to be.  The key is to then figure out what it will take for the employee to reach the new level of performance.  In our work we find it's usually one thing the person needs to start or stop doing to become more effective.  Then you'll want to provide feedback and coaching to help the employee make progress. 

The One Thing...
Ask yourself, "What one thing would help this person be more effective?  People can only work on one or two things at a time.  Choose the highest payoff issue that would make the greatest difference in the employee's performance and choose words that describe what you want them to do (as opposed to having a conversation around the deficiency).  Don't forget to provide feedback when you see the individual making progress on the area for development.  They will know they've been able to meet the expectations and their efforts have been noticed.  While it's important to provide feedback on areas for development it's equally critical to provide timely reinforcing feedback. 

Keep Measuring
Reassess the employee's performance after feedback and coaching has been provided.  Re-plot them to measure the effectiveness of the intervention.  Access the free talent review tool with instructions at http://www.employeeperformancesolutions.com/resources/talent-review-tool/ 

If you are looking for an outside organization to conduct a talent review in your organization contact us. 

Stop Sweeping Performance Issues Under the Rug

Most motivated employees can manage and improve an area of weakness, but only if they are made aware of the issue and are coached.

Case in Point

Steve has been with a technology company for more than eight years going back to when they were a start-up. He is a talented, post-sale technical support engineer who knows the product inside and out and is invaluable in helping customers solve technical problems. But Steve wants to get out of technical support and into sales as a sales engineer. He sees a role for himself in the sales process, and wants to get out of the office and have the opportunity to make more money. Steve has expressed this interest to his boss, who also manages the entire sales organization. Steve's perspective is that he has the skills for a sales engineering position and deserves consideration for an open sales engineer position based on his skill set, tenure, and contributions to the company. However, Steve does not believe he is being given fair consideration for the position - a situation which Steve admits is affecting his attitude as of late. Finally, if the position is filled from the outside Steve would consider this the last straw and begin looking for a job outside the company.In our case study example, the opportunity existed to make Steve - to improve his customer facing demeanor and provide him with an opportunity to grow within the organization. Instead Steve's prospects for moving into a job that matches his interests, ability and potential have been short circuited.

Shame on Steve's Boss

It is important to note that Steve's boss was keenly aware of the issue but chose instead to sweep it under the rug rather than use the information to help Steve overcome his reputation for behaving like the "class clown."
HR's Role

Encouraging and enabling effective, on-going performance discussions and coaching between managers and employees is a perfect place for HR to step up and contribute to organizational success.

How HR Can Help

HR is positioned to bridge the communication chasm between employees and managers which was illustrated in our case study and is very common in the real world. Managers are in a unique position to know their employees strengths and areas for development. Most employees who are aware of their one greatest area for development can and will make progress.

HR has the opportunity to take a more active role in ensuring that managers are regularly communicating key messages to their employees and not relying solely on the once-or-twice-a-year formal performance review process.

Furthermore, HR needs to ensure that managers have the know-how and skills to take their observations about performance and confidently and effectively engage in these discussions with positive outcomes (click here for Tips for Effective Performance Discussions).

Final Word

In the case of Steve, a technical support engineer aspiring to a greater customer- facing role but lacking the professional presence and polish required for such a position, HR needs to take the lead in getting Steve's manager to talk about the one area for development and provide Steve with coaching. At the very least Steve should have the opportunity to become aware of his manager's perceptions and be given the chance to work on translating his informal office personality into a appropriately professional business demeanor. Given how motivated he is to move into the sales engineering role there would be a good chance that he would be successful.

The cost of avoiding performance feedback is very high for both individuals and organizations. We all have a responsibility to take on those performance conversations no matter how daunting they might seem.

It is always a disservice to the employee and the organization to take the path of least resistance and sweep these types of issues under the rug.

Performance Issue: Addressing Office Gossip

A performance issues we've all come across is the office gossip.  The person who takes on the role of behaving like CNN to make sure everyone else hears the "news".  We all have the person or people in the office who spread gossip and thrive on talking about others.  This has the effect of making people feel unsafe; will I be the target of gossip next?  We also know it wastes time as people become disengaged from the work and focused on the topic of the day.  There are usually a handful of people who are the initiators of gossip and the only way to stop it from happening is to address the issue directly with the individual.  Here are a few talking points to use when addressing the gossiping employee:

 

 

"While it's only natural to be interested in what's going on in other people's lives I'd like you to resist the temptation to share personal information that you may be privy to or have learned from others".

OR

"I need for you to hold onto personal information that you may have come across.  I'd like for you to bypass the temptation to share that kind of information with others".

Now you could just as easily say, "I need for you to stop gossiping" but that will most likely be met with a myriad of excuses.  So, try translating what you don't want, "gossiping" into a statement that describes what you do want. 

 

 

Don't Make Employees Mad With a Poorly Delivered Message

Many managers are adept at the objective parts of performance discussion performance, but nearly all of them dread initiating conversations about personal issues such as behaviors and attitudes. The traditional method by which they are taught to provide performance feedback to employees, sometimes referred to as "constructive criticism," is often the very reason they avoid, water down or delay giving feedback in the first place.

That kind of feedback typically sounds like "here's the problem, here are the examples of your shortcomings and this is the negative impact." Inherent limitations with this kind of communication frequently manifest as follow:

• From the employee's perspective performance discussions often come across as finger pointing, fault finding and disciplinary.
• Nearly all managers dread initiating performance conversations, particularly if the issue relates to an unproductive or disruptive behavior.
• Performance issues are ignored or handled poorly, so the resulting issues usually land on the doorstep of HR.

So what can managers do about it? How can they create talking points that are honest, not watered down yet hearable and sayable? 

Understanding Uncensored Perceptions is they key. These are the real feelings about a person or circumstance, which would be inappropriate to share in their raw form. "He's so high-maintenance", "She's a slacker" and "I can't stand it when they do that" are examples of feelings managers might have but are appropriately unwilling to share.

That's probably a good thing, yet most often the manager simply won't say anything at all so the person who should be receiving feedback misses out on the opportunity to gain some awareness around a key issue. 

Negative to Positive..

If you are a manager experiencing this sort of problem, try taking your negative thought and translating it into language that describes the exact opposite.  The result should be that you are thinking and talking in terms of what you want to have happen as opposed to talking about the problem behavior or performance (a surefire way to get the person on the receiving end to react defensively). 

Here are some examples of negative thoughts translated into "develop the ability to" statements:

Excuse Expert Put your energy into identifying solutions Or Be accountable for overcoming roadblocks

Doesn't take responsibility Take Full Responsibility for......(fill in the blank) Or Take Ownership of... ...(fill in the blank)

Lack of confidence Develop the confidence to...(fill in the blank)

Ends justifies the means Means is just as important as the end

Rude and nasty to co-workers Interact respectfully with co-workers

Lacks willingness to adapt Readily adapt when it comes to (fill in the blank)... Or Focus your energies on adapting to......(fill in the blank)

Tattle tale Overlook issues that are outside of your control

Interruptive (cuts other people off mid-sentence) Allow others to finish expressing their thoughts

No desire to learn on their own Take the initiative to add to your job knowledge

Over promises Promise what you know you can deliver

My way or the highway Be open to considering other approaches

When the going gets tough they get going Stick with and deal with difficult problems

Makes assumptions Make conclusions based on facts

Sweats the small stuff Put things into perspective by sorting through the big things and setting the smaller things aside

Liar / Dishonest Communicate information that is based on fact

Condescending to those who are less experienced Use your experience and knowledge to mentor those with less experience

This Works With ANY Issue

The lesson here is that anything we don't like or have a problem with can be translated into a future-focused thought that describes what the performance could and should be.  Realize that the statements above are just the beginning of the conversation because we'll then need to explain in detail what we mean by "Use your experience and knowledge to mentor those with less experience."  We will need to reach agreement with the employee on what the associated actions will be in order to meet the performance objective. 

So for example you would then want to follow with something like, "can we talk about what that would look like?" or I'm thinking of a few ways that this could be done, can we put our heads together and talk about some of those ideas together?"

Providing Performance Feedback; the Right Thing to Do

Do You Work for One of Those Nice Organizations That Avoids Conflict?

One of the excuses we commonly hear as a reason for not actively engaging in dialogue with employees regarding their performance is "we're really nice at XYZ organization" or "We avoid conflict and causing people to feel badly about themselves". Translation, "We have people who are underperforming but we'd rather not have those conversations". Or, "It's just easier to let the underperformance continue as is; I'll just focus on my A and B level players." And finally, "What would we say and how would the person on the receiving end react? We'd rather not go there."

There are many reasons for not having performance conversations. Here are just a few:

• He's only got another two years before retirement.
• She can't change.
• That's the way he's always been.
• What if I make things worse?
• It's a personality issue and it's not my job to deal with that type of thing.
• We can't afford to lose her.

The most contradictory of all the reasons to not provide feedback:

• "We're a gentle, nice type of place to work and we avoid conflict".

Why is it contradictory?
In our research managers admit to waiting for a performance problem to get so bad that they allow it to reach a level where the first step is disciplinary action or getting the ball rolling on moving the person out of the organization. So, if the organization was really the nice place it claimed to be wouldn't it make more sense to provide early-on and actionable feedback that would help the employee get back on track?

One of the questions we ask at every event or workshop is:
When do people first get information on an area of underperformance?

1. Early on when the issue has just emerged?
2. When a persistent pattern has developed.
3. When the manager is so frustrated they are just ready to fire the employee.

Not surprisingly managers and Human Resources professionals report that it's when a persistent pattern has developed (meaning it's time for disciplinary action such as a warning of performance improvement plan) or when the manager is ready to fire the employee. In other words, we'd rather just let the person continue on down the wrong path and then discipline them or get the wheels in motion to fire them.

A Human Resources Director of a Boston based technology company had a manager ask for assistance to move an underperforming employee out of the company. When the HR Director asked the manager when he had a conversation with the employee about the issue he admitted he hadn't brought it up with the employee. She then point blank asked, "So you'd rather fire this person than try to have a conversation about changing the behavior? Sadly the manager answered, "Yes, I'd rather just get rid of the person". Unfortunately this is a common story in many organizations.

Good and kind organizations promote these conversations early on before the issue has reached the point of no return. From the employee's perspective it's particularly unfair when the issue is in their blind spot, they have no idea their performance is problematic. Not because the leader who could and should be having a conversation is unaware of the issue. They are aware of the problem but because most people are unsure of how to go about such discussions they avoid having them in the first place. On the surface this appears to be the "we're a nice organization who doesn't engage in conflict".

From the employee's vantage point withholding key performance information is anything but nice. How many times have people been written off or worked around due to a performance inhibitor? "You know how Jennifer can be, let's not have her on the team this time around". Only for Jennifer to realize she has been left our of various activities and opportunities which can lead to her asking why she wasn't asked to participate. When employees are left out of important meetings, bypassed for promotional opportunities or interesting work, left behind while team members go to lunch together, or whispered about they pick up on the undertones. This leads to further disengagement and only exacerbates the problem.

First Step: Warning or Performance Improvements Plans?
Worse still is when the employee hears about the issue for the first time and is put on a warning or performance plan. Even worse than that is when the person is "laid off" or suddenly fired. What could be more unfair, particularly when there is evidence that most people can get back on track when they receive early on actionable feedback. When managers say the employee is unable to perform we always ask, has the person been given the opportunity to demonstrate his or her true capabilities? If the answer is yes, they have been given feedback and the support to realign their performance then the obvious answer is to get started down the disciplinary path or moving the person out of the organization.  When the answer is no, I haven't really had that kind of conversation, then the conversation about how to be more effective should take place.

Being a kind organization means giving people the opportunity to improve, even when it might mean initiating an uncomfortable conversation. The goal should always be to "help the employee out" before "helping them out of the organization".

For more information about how to provide feedback, particularly on behavior based issues, please see our paper on How to Address Disruptive Employee Behaviors.