In 2015, Deloitte changed its performance management from the traditional forced curve, to a new performance management anchored on three key objectives, to recognize, see, and fuel performance (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015). In the first objective Deloitte sought to recognize performance and align it to compensation in a way that supports high performance. To effectively achieve the first objective, Deloitte had to see clearly the performance. Deloitte had to overcome the two challenges inherent in the traditional system, the rater bias, and the need to rationalize the traditional system of evaluation, achieving consensus, and the final rating (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015). Overcoming rater bias required a shift in approach, instead of conducting a 3600 review that involved asking several people their opinion about an employees, the new system only asked the immediate supervisor four key questions at the end of every project or at the end of every quarter for long-term projects:
Given the much I know about this employee performance, and if it were my money, I would give this employee the highest level of bonus and compensation (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015). This measured the employee performance and their unique contribution to the organization on a five-point scale (strongly agree – strongly disagree) (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015).
Given what I know of this employee I would always want them on my team (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015). This measured the ability of the employee to participate as an important team member on a five-point scale (strongly agree – strongly disagree) (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015).
The employee is at risk for low productivity (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015). This measure identifies the possibility of employees performance dipping and the possibility of problems that may harm the customer on a ‘yes or no’ basis (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015).
This employee is ready for a promotion now (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015).This measures the employees potential on a ‘yes or no’ basis (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015).
These set of question in essence asks managers to indicate what would be their future intentions with the members of their teams rather than asking for an opinion about them (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015). Deloitte observes that managers are more consistent in saying what they will do with their team members than when they are asked to give an opinion about what they think of their team members (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015).
The third objective of the performance management was to fuel performance. To drive performance this means that Deloitte had to incorporate in the performance management strategies that would keep the employees motivated to achieve their objectives. Deloitte observes that, timely informal feedback carried out consistently fuels performance.
Deloitte designed the performance appraisal management to include informal feedback through weekly check-ins with each team member (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015). During the weekly check-ins the managers would set the objectives of the coming weeks, provide feedback about the employee performance, and provide information, coaching or critical new information (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015). The regular check-ins provide strength, purpose, and expectations that are key ingredients for high performing teams (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015).
Deloitte insists on mangers checking-in on their team members every week. The check-ins are not additional work to the team leader, but they are team leaders work (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015). Deloitte is of the view that if a team leader takes longer than a week to check –in on the team members, the employee’s objectives may become fuzzy and aspirational, the leader will be less helpful as a coach and their task will change from coaching for future performance, to evaluating previous performance (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015). Therefore, Deloitte insists that every manager must devote sufficient time and resources to discuss with team members about the upcoming tasks for the week and ensure that the employees are motivated and their goals are in line with the organizational goals.
Cognizant that there are many issues competing for the leader’s time, Deloitte encourages employees to make use of a self-assessment tool that maps the employee’s weaknesses and strengths. Employees are encouraged to share this information with their colleagues and their leaders. Deloitte borrows the concept of employees sharing their objectives, strengths, and challenges with their colleagues and leaders from successful social media technologies that indicate that human beings are overly obsessed with themselves, their achievements, their contributions, and their insights (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015). By making the appraisal system less formal, and more about the individual, it will not be difficult for Deloitte to carry out the informal appraisal on a weekly basis, as there is a heavy buy-in from the employees. The focus on the employee’s strength is an important driver of performance because employees perform the best in areas where they indicate to be good at (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015).
Bacal (2014) observes that if an employee is fired, disciplined, or misses a promotion, there is a chance that such an employee may succeed in suing the organization that the punishment was a case of discrimination, especially if the employee is a member of the protected class unless the organization can provide documented proof of poor performance . There is a risk of an organization facing a court case arising from performance review. Therefore, organizations need to put adequate safeguards to protect themselves against court cases arising from performance reviews.
Bacal (2014) advises that Deloitte can protect itself from court cases arising from performance reviews by adhering to the following practices:
Maintaining quality documentation of performance management reviews, quality documentation will include detailed information regarding employee misconduct or failure to achieve targets (Bacal, 2014). Employee performance ratings are not satisfactory records and an organization cannot use ratings to defend against a legal suit. Deloitte should maintain a comprehensive report about the performance review of each employee. In case of a legal suit, arising from a performance review Deloitte can produce the comprehensive report to prove that the action taken against the employee was not discriminative but was a necessary action due to the employee unsatisfactory performance.
Quality documentation is not sufficient to win a case (Bacal, 2014). Deloitte must maintain records that show evidence of communication with the employee about their performance. This requires Deloitte to ensure that employees sign an acknowledgement of all performance management reviews communications.
Finally, Deloitte should show that they took various steps to improve the employee performance and that Deloitte put reasonable effort (Bacal, 2014). To prove to the court that Deloitte put reasonable effort to improve employee performance, Deloitte must show that the managers put reasonable effort to improve the employee performance through performance improvement programs such as coaching, skills training, and other performance improvement plans.
Deloitte should therefore ensure that they adequately document the performance reviews, communicate the results of the performance reviews to the employee, and ensure that the employee signs an acknowledgment of such communication. In cases where Deloitte identifies poor employee performance, they should take reasonable measure to improve their performance before taking punitive steps against such employees. Such measures will provide Deloitte with a good defense should employees adversely affected by performance review choose to take legal action against Deloitte.
At Deloitte, managers use the three objectives as the basis of measuring performance, recognize, see, and drive performance (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015). Deloitte they also has three practices that support the objectives, weekly check-ins review , quarterly review, and annual compensation program (Buckingham & Goodall, 2015).
Deloitte trains its employees on the skills that an employee may need in order to be able to perform their duties more effectively. This will include enrolling their employees for continuous professional education (CPE) so that the employees keep their skills and knowledge abreast with the latest developments.
The managers also try to capture as much data about the performance of an employee as possible so that they can provide the employee with a feedback about their performance that is as comprehensive as possible. Such information is useful in identifying areas of improvements as well as structure future career moves.
Reference list
Bacal, R. (2014). The Busy Learner's Kit for Making Performance Management and Appraisal
VALUABLE: Walking the Path Together. Createspace Independent.
Buckingham, M., & Goodall, A. (2015, April 01). Reinventing Performance Management.
Retrieved March 16, 2016, from
https://hbr.org/2015/04/reinventing-performance-management
