Managers and their employees would generally agree that when performance is being reviewed there are three desired outcomes. Performance problems should be resolved; the employee should be given some positive motivation and acknowledgment for work done well; and the conversation should be of benefit to the employee as a coaching and development opportunity.



More often than not however, most of the time and focus in these discussions is placed on performance problems, but in a way that neither solves the problems nor results in much development for employees. At the next performance review, the same problems have to be revisited, when the same poor quality process is again applied. The consequence is that the same performance issues are discussed endlessly without being fully resolved; limited time is given to acknowledgment of good performance; and employees experience little if any personal development. Productivity remains low and managers become more stressed because they continue to be short of competent people to whom they can delegate. In the end everyone spends more time ineffectively working with old issues than on looking ahead, identifying new problems and tackling them with energy and innovation.

The process starts when people rush into action with the first solution to a problem that seems appropriate, one usually proposed by the manager. It goes like this. Manager identifies a problem: on the basis of her knowledge and experience she selects a solution: she communicates the problem and the solution to an employee with an instruction for the one to be applied to the other. The employee complies, without input, opinion or comment, none of which are required or requested. When only the manager has input to the problem, it is quite likely that information is overlooked and the solution does not work properly. It is more than likely that the employee is less than committed to the solution because he had no say in it. At the first obstacle, progress halts. Inevitably, the problem resurfaces, blame is cast, more instructions are issued, perhaps more forcefully this time, and the process goes around again.

Everyone becomes more stressed and frustrated, caught in what seems like an endless web of old problems. People on the ground are usually the most stressed because they know what is really going on and what the best solutions would be. But no-one asks for their opinions and faced with a manager they find unapproachable and overbearing, they are reluctant to speak up.

Next time you hold a performance review with an employee, choose a different approach. Decide before the conversation that you will get to the bottom of the problem with the employee before you start looking for a solution. Ask the employee for their information on the situation. Ask how they see it. Ask why they think it arose. Then LISTEN to the answers. Hold back on your opinion, no matter how certain you are that you know what happened and why. Keep LISTENING until you have heard all that the employee has to say. Realise that you may have do to some encouraging at first if your people have become accustomed to your doing all the thinking for them in the past.

Then ask what they think can be done to improve the situation. Take time to LISTEN properly and to consider their ideas and opinions. Make them feel safe in putting forward their ideas by acknowledging what they have said. As far as you can, build your own ideas onto theirs so that the final solution belongs to both of you. In the end the chances are that together you will come up with better quality solutions. For certain you will have solutions to which both of you are more committed.

At the end of the conversation use the Red Pen Test to check out how you have done. List all the actions that have been agreed. Then circle in red those that have NOT been put forward by you. The more red ink you use, the more your people will be committed to action plans, and the faster you can expect commitment to grow and performance to improve.