Employee Performance Measurement Baseline: There's No Such Thing
Optimize team management in minutes with ManageBetter. Start your free trial now and join Uber and Microsoft in boosting performance, gathering insights, and generating reviews—all AI-powered, no writing required.
Earlier this week, a HR professional claimed that every employee has a “stable performance equilibrium.”
I strongly disagree.
Employees are not robots. We do not consistently perform to an exact standard 100% of the time. And even robots can fail or need maintenance. So even they do not have a “stable” performance baseline.
Sure, some employees perform consistently. They’re as reliable as can be.
But humans are meant to have fluctuations in performance. Sometimes, it’s unintentional. Their performance can suffer because they:
Have insomnia.
Have trouble commuting to work.
Are distracted by issues outside of the office such as divorce proceedings.
Need to postpone meetings to care for sick/young ones or attend to medical treatments.
Other times, it’s intentional. Employees may:
Choose to put less effort at work because it doesn’t affect their compensation. Or it affects their compensation, but they don’t care.
Steal time away from work to focus on personal interests like a side business or personal activities like clipping one’s nails.
I’m not here to judge on whether it’s appropriate to care for family members.
My key point is this: we’re not robots. Hence, we should’t expect individuals to have stable performance. From here, there are several important implications that we often miss:
We Shouldn’t Expect Stable Performance Reviews
High achievers, in particular, expect to get “exceeds expectations” forever. It’s almost as-if they’ve always received A’s in school and expect the same at work.
On the flip side, managers are shy about giving their high performers a bad review. Just because you give a C to your A talent doesn’t mean they are a C player. That C is simply a snapshot for a given situation and time.
Take for instance that TV show Undercover Boss. The executives in question could be A+ executives, but when doing an unfamiliar front-line (non-executive) job (at their company!) they usually get a F grade. The executives don’t seem offended by their failing grades or criticism. We shouldn’t either.
Takeaway 1: Embrace fluctuating performance reviews.
Takeaway 2: Managers, stop your biases against your non-A performers. Maybe those folks actually did have an A+ kind of year.
Stop Taking Performance Reviews Personally
Many of us interpret bad performance reviews as a character assassination. We become defensive. Then we complain to our spouse and friends. And friends, being the awesome cheerleaders they are, encourage us to update our resume and find a new job.
We shouldn’t let a performance review — good or bad — define who we are. Because who knows, maybe the performance review is wrong; scientific studies show that roughly 20% of performance reviews actually reflect our actual performance. The remaining 80% of grade reflects the reviewer’s quirks. For instance, they may choose to grade more leniently than they should because they don’t want to make enemies.
But let’s say the performance review is right. Then we have to consider: what’s wrong with a little criticism? It’s an opportunity to improve. And feedback doesn’t make you any less of a person. You’re still an awesome human being. Don’t let a performance review change any of that.
Takeaway 3: Don’t take reviews personally. You’re awesome all the same.
Takeaway 4: Even seemingly perfect folks can perform poorly in special situations. So maybe the criticism is valid.
Sharpen Your Leadership Edge: Join 3,000+ executives receiving weekly, actionable insights from industry experts. Subscribe free to The Thoughtful Leader and elevate your team's performance.
