Performance Reviews Are Neither Objective Nor Fair, Management Prof Says
Employees who beef about the unfairness of performance reviews are getting some backing from a management professor who says they hinder trusting relationships in the workplace.
In a New York Times op-ed, University of California at Los Angeles professor Samuel Culbert says his studies show performance reviews measure how comfortable a boss is with an employee. He sees the assessments as “an intimidating tool” that makes employees reluctant to speak their minds.
The reviews are touted as objective assessments when they actually are subjective, he writes. That’s why it’s not unusual for a person’s performance review to change after switching bosses.
Culbert instead advocates a “performance preview” in which the boss and employee are responsible for setting goals and working together for continuous improvement.
Culbert notes that proponents of eliminating collective bargaining in Wisconsin are arguing the change will make it easier to reward high-performing workers. “Unions in Wisconsin are justified in worrying that limiting collective bargaining would lead to capricious firing or demotions, whether for age, personality, salary or any other criterion you can think of,” he writes. “It’s the inevitable result of giving the boss the subjective power to define and judge another’s performance.”
