How can you handle difficult conversations during a performance review?

Performance reviews need to be periodic to help both the individual and manager ensure the goals are tracked, progress recorded and feedback shared Process involved following 1. Agree upon goals that can be achievable in a given timeframe 2. Monitor track progress periodically 3. Share feedback and suggestions to improve 4. Use the sandwich method to share feedback 5. Be a good listener 6. Chalk out an action plan with SMART goals for improvement 7. politely provide honest feedback and share instances of low performance

Handling difficult conversations during a performance review necessitates a delicate balance of empathy, honesty, and constructive feedback. Begin by creating a positive and open atmosphere, emphasizing the goal of improvement rather than criticism. Clearly communicate specific instances or behaviors that need addressing, providing examples to illustrate your points. Encourage the employee to share their perspective and feelings, fostering a collaborative discussion. Active listening is crucial, demonstrating genuine interest in their concerns and acknowledging their emotions. Propose solutions collaboratively and set realistic goals for improvement, ensuring a clear path forward.

Stay calm and keep focused on specific actions or behaviors, not personal traits. Listen to the other person's perspective and show that you understand. Discuss solutions together and be constructive about improvement. End on a positive note, emphasizing growth and future improvements. Remember, the goal is to address issues while maintaining a positive and constructive tone.

It's important to distinguish between different conversations types. A performance review is a longterm view on the person and the underlying intention here is longterm development or growth. It shouldn't only include one's own goals and perspective but uncover the feedback receivers' too. Otherwise it can feel like an uncomfortable shower that the feedback receiver "allows" or "endures" rather than something to get excited by. Can you formulate an underlying intention that the performance review receiver doesn't just buy into but is excited by?

In the B2B SaaS realm, choosing the right time and place for a performance review is pivotal. Schedule it in advance, respecting the employee's time and allowing them to prepare. Opt for a private, distraction-free space to foster open communication. Avoid peak stress times to ensure both parties are focused. Creating this conducive environment is vital for a meaningful and constructive performance review, aligning with our commitment to growth and open dialogue.

The time, place (and duration) needs to align with the level and detail of feedback. I agree with Eric Lim's suggestion of instant feedback, though I would suggest a mixed mode instead. Quick feedback is good for straightforward, one-off takeaways, especially when they are fresh in everyone's mind. However, it's also helpful to establish a pattern of greater, in-depth coaching to show the person receiving feedback trends as well as jointly building plans for career development. This requires additional thought and preparation on both the party giving, as well as receiving the feedback and better done in a structured, environment.

Feedback in the moment is appropriate for most situations. Early in our relationship, I tend to ask direct reports how they like to receive feedback. Some prefer to read the feedback, process it, then jump on a call for reflection. Others might want a direct conversation right away. For performance reviews specifically, this should be done regularly on an annual or bi-annual basis. It's a time to reflect for both parties and I would expect to have a fruitful conversation about how everything has been going since our last formal review. If we have a strong feedback practice, there shouldn't be any surprises.

I disagree with the sandwich method, unless you’re a fan of eating s**t sandwiches. Brene Brown says “Clear is kind. Unclear is unkind.” What is less clear than heading into a performance conversation and getting mixed messages? The fact is, a supervisor should build trust in many other situations before and after the performance conversation so the individual trusts the intent in which feedback is delivered. During, the supervisor should feel genuine care and concern, and be delivering the feedback because they truly want the individual on the receiving end to improve.

I prefer the "even better if" instead of the sandwich method. An example would be, "your client calls have been going well and would be even better if you added an agenda to the beginning of each chat." This method allows you to compliment them on their performance, while also adding areas of opportunity without making it feel like you're pandering.

Also: praise is an important and underestimated part of performance reviews. This too becomes stronger when underlined by observations. For example: "The way you handled that difficult client meeting was exquisite. I observed how you mirrored their frustration back to them using their own words. They quickly transitioned from complaining to nodding along with you which made me thing "they trust her, she's won them back". I don't think we could have pulled off the project the way we did if you hadn't shown up the way you did when things got tough. Thank you!"

Ensure that the person receiving feedback, understands, accepts and owns it. Look out for "deflectors", people who seek to avoid ownership of (negative) feedback by attributing it to events or conditions outside of the scope of their control (e.g., a report they had to provide was late because they kept getting interrupted, or their laptop kept crashing, etc.)

When empathizing, ensure the recipient understands the feedback is objective, it's in the context of the business, and not a personal view. In many cases, it's natural and can be expected that the recipient becomes defensive and interprets the feedback as a personal attack from you (shooting the messenger). In these cases, make sure that the person understands that it is not from you but rather you are delivering it on behalf of the company and the reason for the feedback is to improve either 1) the person's overall career growth opportunities, or 2) their impact on the business.

Coaching rather than managing people in the first place is The key to achieving high performance team members, at the end of the day, we are all human beings with a common need to be understood, appreciated and supported.

well 😅 business is business ! so we must focus on facts rather than subjective statements that could be taken personal. in order to stay focused on facts we should discuss the objectives and actions of that individual (which should have been set in advance and clearly agreed and communicated to him/her) then highlight the achievements of the same and discuss the gaps and possible improvement actions with full involvement of the individual. indeed; the same applies to positive side of the evaluation; if the individual exceeded the expectations in some of the tasks set for him/her.

Sometimes we confuse different types of conversations. If I as the leader have given direction e.g. we are sailing north-west and then my team sails west, this doesn't require a performance review or even feedback but a short manouvre critique: "hey, please adjust back to north-west – no sandwiching required here.