Job Evaluations Again

I will be the first to admit that I am biased when it comes to job evaluations. I do not like them. Whether it is being on the receiving end or giving them, I find the dynamic to be uncomfortable. In fact, it is nearly as uncomfortable as asking for a pay raise. Even if it is justified, the idea of  asking for more money because you have had a great year, you discovered a cure for hiccups, or simply because you are a hard worker, feels a bit degrading. The same is true when one is being evaluated by their boss. Trying to maintain a level of detached coolness while another, point by point, identifies things you could have done better or should have done at all is not easy.  

My sense is when job evaluations are mentioned, people tend to think of the person who is being evaluated. But what about the person who does the interviewing? Their job, after all, is not only to assess the performance of the worker but do so in a way that demoralize them. This requires a great deal of thought and planning. The evaluator, of course, wants to be fair and thorough, but also encouraging and caring. People are vulnerable creatures whether we admit it or not. Being the subject of any level of criticism, regardless of how well intentioned, puts most any one on edge or in a defensive posture.

The evaluator faces a communication challenge. Their goal is to be truly heard and understood. Ideally, what they say should motivate the employee to try and do better, to improve their level of effort even if they believe they cannot work any harder than they have. I view performance evaluations like a special cake. If at all possible, its ingredients must include praise, sensitivity, constructive suggestions, and great clarity. Not everyone can walk this tightrope. One or two false steps can be devastating to the person who is being evaluated. But if successful, the evaluation can serve as a major springboard for greater performance.