Performance Reviews are seen as one of those necessary evils that are sometimes seen as the metric by which bonus compensations are best paid out. I.e., what level of objectives did I meet that made earning this bonus relevant.
This is a very tricky scenario because constant changing business conditions can throw the most adaptable performance review plans a curve ball making their content and criteria for compensation irrelevant. But the fault for performance reviews do not lay solely with an organization (the Reviewer) but can also lay with the person receiving the review as well (the Reviewee). There are those that believe when they sign onto an organization that their bonus is expected – I clock in, I do my work, I receive my bonus – regardless of my review.
And this could not be further from the truth.
If we were separate out all the financial inner-workings behind a Performance Review, we are left with a program that should seek to create a program wherein the Reviewee grows not by the current set upon standard but rather by their own that they define, one where the Reviewer is much more highly engaged in helping this individual grow in their career and not as someone really performing the review, but guiding them on this journey.
I’ve encompassed my thoughts on both sides of this program in the following SlideShare – a little lengthier than my normal fair.