Ann Marie Puig


Ann Marie Puig discusses best practices for handling employee reviews

Performance review strategies and approaches change from one business to the next. However, there are certain standards about how to communicate with a worker about their actions that can be applied. Regardless of whether it’s a presentation survey, a pay-change reunion, or the execution of a performance improvement plan (PIP), employers need to understand the basics before discussing performance with an employee. Ann Marie Puig, a lifelong entrepreneur and philanthropist from Costa Rica, offers best practices when it comes time to dealing with employee reviews.

The employee should never find out about either positive execution of duties or the need to improve unexpectedly during a performance review, except if it is new data or smart knowledge. Asserts Puig, “Successful supervisors talk about both positive execution and zones for development consistently, even every day or week after week with employees. Make the substance of the review conversation a re-accentuation of primary focuses.”

In light of a legitimate concern for giving normal criticism, performance reviews are not a yearly function; quarterly meetings are suggested with workers. In an average organization, work organization and assessment reunions happen two times every year. Career advancement is likewise typically discussed two times every year, so the representative talks about their work and profession in set meetings usually four times each year.

Regardless of the parts of the performance review measures, the initial step is objective setting. It is fundamental that the employee knows precisely what is anticipated from their presentation. Your intermittent conversations about execution need to zero in on these critical bits of the worker’s work. You have to report this occupation plan: objectives and desires in an employment plan or employment desires design, or in your boss’s configuration. Without a composed understanding and a mutual image of the representative’s objectives, accomplishment for the worker is improbable.

Ensure that you likewise share the performance review design with the worker so the person in question isn’t shocked toward the finish of the review time-frame. A critical segment of this assessment conversation is to impart to the representative how your association will evaluate execution. Adds Puig, “The representative needs to understand that, if he or she does what is normal, they will be viewed as a performing worker. In certain associations that rank workers, this is what might be compared to a three on a five-point scale. A worker must accomplish something other than perform to be viewed as an outstanding representative.”

Request input from co-workers who have worked intimately with the employee. Once in a while, called 360-degree criticism since you are getting input for the representative from his or her supervisor, associates and staff, you utilize the criticism to expand the review data that you accommodate the worker.

Start with casual conversations to acquire input data. Consider building up a configuration so the input is easy to process and impart to the director. If the organization utilizes a structure that you complete ahead of time of the meeting, give the review to the representative ahead of time. This permits the individual to process the substance before the conversation. This basic motion can eliminate a great deal of the feeling and show from the exhibition survey meeting.

Plan for the conversation with the worker. Never go into a presentation survey without planning. If you make things up along the way, performance reviews come up short. You will pass up on key chances for criticism and improvement, and the representative won’t feel energized about his or her successes. The documentation that you kept up during the presentation survey period serves you well as you plan for a representative’s exhibition audit.

When you’re ready to meet with the representative, invest energy in the positive parts of their presentation. By and large, the conversation of the positive segments of the representative’s performance should occupy additional time than that of the negative segments. “For the highly successful workers and your performing representatives, positive input and conversation about how the worker can keep on developing her presentation ought to involve most of the conversation. The representative will locate this fulfilling and persuading,” says Puig.

The representative needs to believe that you need to assist them with improving their performance. The representative also needs to hear you state that you believe in their capacity to improve. This encourages them to accept that they have the capacity and support to improve.

The discussion is the watchword when you characterize a performance review meeting. If you are doing all of the talking or the meeting turns into a sermon, the review is less compelling. The worker will feel treated unjustifiably; this isn’t the manner by which you need workers feeling as they leave their review session.