Clear Review has joined Advanced - Discover our full suite of powerful and innovative people management solutions

Find out more
Back to Overview

Should you use performance ratings for employees?

Man in black suit holding a card with 3 yellow stars on it.

The use of employ­ee per­for­mance rat­ing is with­out doubt the hottest top­ic of debate in per­for­mance man­age­ment cir­cles at the moment. Should you use an over­all per­for­mance rat­ing as part of your employ­ee reviews or appraisals?

In many ways it seems an obvi­ous thing to do — most com­pa­nies want an easy way of under­stand­ing who their good and bad per­form­ers are. Indeed, the 2014 E‑Reward per­for­mance man­age­ment sur­vey found that 77% of organ­i­sa­tions used employ­ee per­for­mance rat­ings. But there is now an increas­ing back­lash against rat­ing per­for­mance, and some high pro­file com­pa­nies such as Adobe, GE and Microsoft have aban­doned them.

The Prob­lem with Employ­ee Per­for­mance Ratings

Some stud­ies have found that per­for­mance rat­ings actu­al­ly demo­ti­vate employ­ees and neg­a­tive­ly impact per­for­mance, except for those peo­ple rat­ed at the high­est end of the scale. Fur­ther­more, research into neu­ro­science has found that per­for­mance rat­ings acti­vate a flight or fight response in the brain and decreas­es sub­se­quent performance.

Researchers have also found that employ­ee per­for­mance improves through good qual­i­ty feed­back and that assign­ing a per­for­mance rat­ing tends to pre­vent that feed­back from being tak­en on board. The rat­ing is what the employ­ees remem­ber after the event, and not the dis­cus­sions that went with it.

A final prob­lem with per­for­mance rat­ings is that they are large­ly sub­jec­tive and prone to a num­ber of proven rat­ing bias­es such as the​”con­trast effect”, halo and horns effect”,​”sim­i­lar-to-me effect” and​”cen­tral ten­den­cy bias”.

Why Per­for­mance Rat­ing Can Be Useful

Despite these prob­lems, many organ­i­sa­tions are still using employ­ee per­for­mance rat­ings. The main argu­ments for rat­ing per­for­mance are:

  • It pro­vides a con­ve­nient way of man­ag­ing per­for­mance relat­ed pay — although there are cer­tain­ly a num­ber of ways you can man­age rewards with­out per­for­mance rat­ings.

  • It enables organ­i­sa­tions to under­stand who their top per­form­ers are for tal­ent plan­ning purposes.

  • It can pro­vide sup­port­ing evi­dence when tak­ing action against poor per­form­ers (e.g. in dis­missal cases).

  • It lets employ­ees know where they stand in rela­tion to their peers.

Should You Rate Employ­ee Performance?

This is the key ques­tion, and there is no right answer as it will depend on what your ulti­mate goals are for your per­for­mance man­age­ment process. Our advice would be to ques­tion whether you real­ly need per­for­mance rat­ings and, if you are using them, eval­u­ate their effec­tive­ness in achiev­ing your per­for­mance man­age­ment goals. Do some inter­nal research to find out from your employ­ees and man­agers whether they find that rat­ings actu­al­ly improve per­for­mance and moti­va­tion or neg­a­tive­ly impact it.

How Employ­ee Per­for­mance Rat­ings Can Be Improved

If you decide that you should rate employ­ee per­for­mance, here are some things that you can do to min­imise the poten­tial neg­a­tive impact of rat­ings and improve their accuracy:

  1. Con­sid­er ask­ing tar­get­ed ques­tions that iden­ti­fy high/​low per­for­mance rather than pro­vid­ing a sin­gle per­for­mance rat­ing. For exam­ple, con­sult­ing firm Deloitte has come up with four ques­tions man­agers should ask them­selves when mea­sur­ing staff per­for­mance, instead of using per­for­mance and poten­tial ratings.

  2. Train man­agers to rate per­for­mance objec­tive­ly and avoid rat­ing bias­es.

  3. De-cou­­ple per­for­mance rat­ings from pay reviews — per­for­mance dis­cus­sions and rat­ings will be more hon­est if pay reviews take place sev­er­al months after the employ­ee rat­ing is assigned. Plus, the pay review should take into account oth­er fac­tors such as mar­ket rate and changes in job respon­si­bil­i­ty, as well as the per­for­mance rating.

  4. Try to avoid the use of forced dis­tri­b­u­tion for rat­ings, as research shows they can have dam­ag­ing effects on morale and any ben­e­fits tend to be lim­it­ed to the first year or so of its use.

  5. Mon­i­tor the con­sis­ten­cy of rat­ings across the organ­i­sa­tion and check for pat­terns or bias­es. Con­sis­ten­cy can be improved through​”peer reviews” or cal­i­bra­tion” where­by groups of man­agers get togeth­er to review and com­pare each oth­er’s rat­ings and high­light any notice­able employ­ee per­for­mance rat­ing pat­terns or stand-out decisions.

  6. Avoid the use of labels such as​”sat­is­fac­to­ry” or com­pe­tent” for mid­dle rat­ings. It can be demo­ti­vat­ing as nobody likes being described as aver­age. Instead, con­sid­er more pos­i­tive ter­mi­nol­o­gy like​”effec­tive”.

Your Per­for­mance Man­age­ment Soft­ware Should Sup­port Your Cho­sen Approach

Some per­for­mance man­age­ment sys­tems are com­plete­ly cen­tred around an over­all per­for­mance rat­ing. With Clear Review, we don’t tie you into rat­ing employ­ee per­for­mance — you can choose to focus on qual­i­ta­tive feed­back and per­for­mance devel­op­ment instead. If you want to have rat­ings, our per­for­mance man­age­ment soft­ware also gives you the option of rat­ing indi­vid­ual ele­ments of per­for­mance, hav­ing an over­all rat­ing, or ask­ing tar­get­ed ques­tions — the choice is yours.

Get started with our free version!

Begin your journey today at no cost. Loved by HR professionals and employees alike, become a part of our community of hundreds of thousands of users who depend on Clear Review to enhance both their performance and their teams. Join the Clear Review movement for free and achieve your highest potential.

Get Started