Most forward-thinking organisations take performance management seriously with appraisal and review processes being embedded in the business. Traditionally, this was an annual process whereby the appraisal document was completed, discussed, and in many cases just filed or used for pay reviews. In effect, performance management has been treated as an annual box-ticking exercise.
Nowadays, there is recognition that good performance management is about having an ongoing development discussion between leader and employee. It involves open and frank discussion around attainment, key performance indicators and future expectations, and the route to achieving lasting development.
However, the focus of performance management is mainly on past performance with less data being gathered on how a leader may grow and develop their own skills and experiences. Moreover, existing performance reviews do not consider the context of performance either or the motivations and behaviors of the participant.
An objective approach to leadership assessment
In our experience using well-validated psychometric assessment and/or 360-degree feedback in performance management gives a fresh and new dimension to the performance discussion, because of the psychological constructs they measure.
For example, a leader’s cognitive ability is an accurate predictor of problem-solving, the ability to learn quickly, and the ability of a candidate to apply the learning. Situational Judgement Tests help us to understand work attainment and skill and personality assessment measures key leadership competencies, a candidate’s motivation, and even behavioral de-railers which become evident in stressful times.
360-degree feedback offers real insight into a candidate's past performance and development needs.
More reliable than other assessment methods
Evidence shows that a well-constructed psychometric and 360-degree feedback assessment process can add significantly to the performance management process especially when cognitive ability is assessed as this alone is more reliable than any interview process.
Identifying the top 1%
The top 1% of the workforce are 12 times more productive than the bottom 1% (Hunter, Schmid and Judiesch, 1990). Conversely, the bottom 1% are 12 times less productive than the top 1% Given this fact it is essential for organizations to get the performance development processes right.
Well-constructed multiple assessment methods are far more dependable because each psychological construct is independent of others and is measured using different methodologies. In other words, a more thorough process of assessment will yield significantly more detailed evidence.
Our Leadership Assessment Best Practices
Review your existing performance management process and ask yourself whether it is effective at understanding a participant’s future as well as past attainment.
Compare this data with real-life performance information and ask yourself whether the performance management system has accurately addressed performance development needs.
Also, ask yourself if enough performance data is being gathered to help the leader to become more effective.
Review and redesign performance management processes where needed and embrace psychometric assessment and 360-degree feedback as part of the process.
Conclusion
Having robust and objective performance management processes in place is a prerequisite for high-performance working. Finding and developing the magical 1% of high performers will add significant value to the bottom line. Conversely, managing the bottom 1% of employees is equally as important.
Did you find this article useful?
Yes, I'm now considering Leadership Assessment
Yes, but I already use Leadership Assessment
I'm not interested in Leadership Assessment