THE EVALUATION OF EVALUATIONS

Managing people in a professional context is never an easy task. After all, you are, by definition, not working alone and have to take into account the peculiarities, personalities and compentences of your employees. Just like it is best to take into account the guidelines and culture of the organisation where you are a manager.

Much has been written about management in HR literature. And rightfully so, because isn’t there a saying that it is mainly the managers who determine whether or not someone stays in an organisation? Being a manager also means evaluating and supporting people. And in recent years, we’ve seen a tendency to move away from traditional performance management with annual evaluations (with or without a score) to continuous informal feedback. Never Work Alone wondered how managers experience this tendency in practice.

KBC managers Cis Boeckx and David Demeyer will kick things off. They both manage a team of about 30 employees. Cis in the KBC insurance branch, David in the data analysis branch of KBC bank.

Boeckx: “Until a few years ago, KBC had a fairly traditional way of evaluating employees: an annual interview with interim evaluations along the way. We have since transitioned to a system that we call ‘continuous progression dialogues’. At least twice a year, but preferably more if useful and possible, we sit down with the colleague in question to discuss how they would evaluate their performance. Are they still on track? Do they feel good? Do they need additional support or training? And does their perception match mine? KBC also provides a digital tool, named Francis, for these discussions.”

Demeyer: “I don’t plan a fixed number of progression dialogues with my team members. Everyone can choose what they prefer, but we do try to aim for an average of one conversation per month. The way in which we have these conversations is also completely up to my employees. Some prefer a physical conversation, others a digital one. They can be held in a traditional office, but as far as I’m concerned, they can also be held while walking in a forest or park. We do what works best for the employee, as that is ultimately the goal: making sure the employee feels their best and can therefore perform optimally.”

Boeckx: “I needed some time in the beginning to find the best approach. My employees had to learn too. Especially those with a longer track record who were used to the annual evaluation interview. I wrote a manual of sorts for both myself and my employees. What is the purpose of the dialogues? And how do I prepare?”

And what are your experiences now?

Boeckx: “Very positive actually. I really feel like these conversations enable my colleagues to perform better, which motivates them more. It also works better for me than our previous system.”

Demeyer: “Indeed. I have only been a manager for three years, so I cannot really compare with the previous system, but it’s clear it works. You can react much more quickly, and rather than focusing on what someone’s performance in the past was like, you put emphasis on support, help and adjustment where necessary. Employees therefore do not experience these conversations as threatening, but rather as supportive. Being able to react quickly is also a major advantage. It allows managers to make certain matters very concrete by providing quick feedback and support. That is much less possible with annual evaluations.”

And what about remuneration? How do you deal with that?

Boeckx: “At KBC, remuneration is completely separate from our progression dialogues and that’s very important. Decisions about deserving a bonus or wage increase are taken in the direction team and I, as teamleader, can nominate someone.”

Demeyer: “Those nominations challenge me as a manager. I have to justify with sufficient arguments why I think someone deserves a bonus or a wage increase. My experience tells me that my employees don’t see extra pay as an incentive or motivator to work harder, but rather as a welcome financial pat on the back. Or in other words, as a sign of appreciation.”

Outside the financial sector, Never Work Alone also talked to Unit-T team leader Jeroen De Middeleer.

De Middeleer: “Unit-T is a subcontractor of Telenet. Originally, we were part of it. Now we do technical work at clients’ homes on behalf of Telenet and others. As a team leader, I supervise some 30 technical staff on the road.”

How does your evaluation system work and how do you personally experience it?

De Middeleer: “When we were still part of Telenet, we also had a formal evaluation on which any bonus and wage increase depended. After the split, we moved away from that and transitioned to what we call ‘on the fly evaluations’. That works much better because you can react quickly. It doesn’t really make sense to be evaluated in September on something you worked on in January. That isn’t really motivating, especially if a score or a bonus is linked to it.”

Is wage now completely separated from employees’ performances?

De Middeleer: “Not entirely. And I don’t think that’s such a bad thing. In one way or another, it is something that may motivate my employees. It isn’t the biggest motivator, but it still helps. Someone who has worked really hard appreciates a reward for that hard work.”

Do you find it easy to have such continuous evaluations?

De Middeleer: “It is the best system I can think of. But I wouldn’t call it easy. You have to invest time in it and there are less team leaders now.  I don’t need to draw a picture to show that with two managers, you can put much less time and quality into supporting your team. This increases the workload for everyone. As a manager, you are often caught between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, you are partly responsible for achieving company objectives, but on the other hand, you also have to listen to and be there for the employees you manage. Interesting, because you have to understand both sides. But it definitely isn’t the easiest job!”

Never Work Alone 2022 | Author: Vic Van Kerrebroeck | Image: Shutterstock