{"id":1008585,"date":"2021-01-06T19:06:03","date_gmt":"2021-01-06T19:06:03","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/america.guide\/?p=1008585"},"modified":"2021-01-06T19:06:03","modified_gmt":"2021-01-06T19:06:03","slug":"why-your-employee-approach-can-undermine-business-success","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/thisamericandream.com\/why-your-employee-approach-can-undermine-business-success\/","title":{"rendered":"Why Your Employee Approach Can Undermine Business Success"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Expert\u2019s game changing performance management strategy a boon for business owners, department heads and human resource managers<\/strong><\/em><\/h4>\n\n\n\n
\"\"<\/figure><\/div>\n\n\n\n

If you want to be the best and grow your business, not only do you have to hire and reward the best … you must either develop or remove<\/em> the rest. It\u2019s that simple. Toward this end, you might be surprised to learn that traditional, so-called \u201ctried-and-true\u201d performance management methods fail. One top offender is the ubiquitous and erroneously exalted Performance Review.

According to leadership expert and executive coach Roxi Bahar Hewertson, CEO of Highland Consulting Group, Inc. and AskRoxi.com<\/a>, \u201cThis HR \u2018tool\u2019 will not help your business achieve ANY of its growth results. In fact, leaning on performance reviews to assess staffers can greatly increase the likelihood of achieving the exact opposite results.\u201d

Business leaders and human resource professionals have had a doctrine hammered into them that annual evaluations or reviews are sufficient to document employee performance. According to Hewertson, who just released her highly anticipated second book, \u201c<\/em>Hire Right, Fire Right: A Leader\u2019s Guide to Finding and Keeping Your Best People<\/a>,\u201d<\/em> the problem with that logic is it\u2019s short-sighted and often inaccurate. \u201cThere are times when managers need to fire someone, but find that nothing in that person\u2019s \u2018personnel file\u2018 indicates a problem, and too often the opposite is true,\u201d she says. \u201cThis is a chronic problem when supervisors don\u2019t like to (or don\u2019t know how to) deliver ongoing constructive feedback when it\u2019s needed\u2014all year long rather than during one ceremonial yearly event. This is the stuff grievances, arbitrations and lawsuits are made of and, quite often, are legal battles lost by management for good reason. Having an annual performance evaluation or review isn\u2019t a panacea. It\u2019s more akin to \u201cusing a broken crutch for a broken leg.<\/em>\u201d

In fact, studies are emerging that further substantiate such performance evaluation shortcomings. A recent U.S. National Library of Medicine\/National Institutes of Health study published<\/a> in 2020 provides evidence that \u201cperformance feedback discussions can have counterproductive effects by increasing<\/em> the recipient\u2019s self-serving attributions for past performance<\/em>,\u201d with unintended associated effects including \u201clower feedback acceptance\u201d and \u201clower motivation to change.\u201d

<\/em>Businesses need something far more effective because the \u201cold way\u201d is just not going to help retain your best talent, engage your high potentials, or course correct below-par performance. Ultimately, annual performance evaluations are a waste of management\u2019s time and your organization\u2019s money while exacerbating opportunity loss. And, \u201cnearly everyone hates to give and receive them,\u201d Hewertson says.

There\u2019s a better way.

Hewertson advocates that businesses wholly replace formal Performance Reviews with a Personal Dialogues (PD) Process. A PD is not<\/em><\/strong> a traditional performance evaluation. As Hewertson explains, it is instead a powerful and highly strategic conversation between a supervisor and an employee that happens at least once a year<\/em> and is followed up by check-ins<\/em> that happen quarterly<\/em> at the very least, sometimes even more frequently.  

\u201cIt\u2019s important to establish a protocol and methodology that managers and employees understand and agree to follow,\u201d she says. \u201cInstead of dreading the \u2018annual review\u2019 meeting, a PD is a two-way conversation that both parties can look forward to. It\u2019s one that builds, versus diminishes, rapport and trust. The PD is intended to engage both parties in positive ways and add real value.\u201d

Prepping for a Productive Personal Dialogue
<\/strong>Hewertson recommends completing two full annual cycles to allow the process to normalize within your organization\u2019s culture. \u201cYou\u2019ll likely find that both staff and supervisors may be initially resistant to the change, but will begin looking forward to these powerful conversations,\u201d she notes. \u201cThis is, in part, due to the increase in trust and synergy these conversations generate between the supervisor and the employee as well as the measurable positive business results. The Personal Dialogue process can become a rock-solid cornerstone of dynamic cultural change.\u201d

Hewertson suggests that the PD is scheduled at a mutually convenient time and place allowing enough time for both parties to thoughtfully consider and answer the PD questions thoroughly. Hewertson, has had hundreds of these conversations, sometimes in her office, in the employee\u2019s workspace, in a park, on a boat, at a restaurant and even at a botanical garden.

You might throw up your arms and say, \u201cThat\u2019s crazy! I don\u2019t have extended lengths of time to spend with each of my direct reports!\u201d

<\/em>Consider this: What if you DO NOT spend that time with your employees<\/em>?  You\u2019re already spending some of that time now on performance reviews, and dreading it, with the result likely to be a waste of your time, and theirs. In fact, it\u2019s now known that there is a predictable loss of retention of top performers after traditional performance evaluations occur and productivity often goes down among satisfactory employees. Clearly this is not a smart business strategy.

If that weren\u2019t incentive enough, consider how much time and money your organization spends recruiting and onboarding staff. Or, if they\u2019ve been with you for a while, add up how much time and money it will cost you to replace even one of them if they leave because they aren\u2019t happy in the job, aren\u2019t feeling heard or valued, aren\u2019t engaged are underperforming and don\u2019t know it … or all of the above?

\u201cAcquiring and retaining talent is a relational, not a transactional, process,\u201d Hewertson says. This is among the fundamental concepts she shares in her book, \u201c<\/em>Hire Right, Fire Right<\/a>,\u201d <\/em>in which she also defines and explores the ARC employee life cycle: Acquisition (hire right), Retention (nurture right), Closure (fire right). Her book meticulously guides decision makers through each of these three key interactions relative to both new and existing employees. \u201cLeaders need tangible and tactical tools, like the PD process as one example, to help ensure their organizations are well equipped to not just take on these talent management challenges … but actually win on these key fronts. By following this kind of highly strategic system for developing employees, decision makers can dramatically boost employee retention rates\u2014and revel in the resultant ROI benefits.\u201d

The Personal Dialogue Process
<\/strong>Hewertson\u2019s PD process involves three perspectives: (1) the employee\u2019s perspective; (2) the employee\u2019s beliefs <\/em>about the supervisor\u2019s perspective; and (3) the supervisor\u2019s perspective. Individually, the supervisor and the direct report write down answers to a series of ten questions (below) prior to their meeting<\/em> where they will present and discuss their respective answers.  \u201cIt\u2019s insightful to see how accurate or inaccurate the employee\u2019s \u2018reading\u2019 is of their direct supervisor,\u201d she says. \u201cThey both gain valuable insight about how much they are, or are not, on the same page and can respectively course correct on the spot.\u201d

Hewertson\u2019s PD process for each question<\/em> goes like this:<\/p>\n\n\n\n