Business Performance Assessment Program Warning Flag 6 – Massaging the Message for the Boss

Constructively critical business performance assessments often present executives and managers with a difficult to accept performance message. While intended to improve overall organizational performance, leaders may take these assessments as an affront to their authority or condemnation of their performance and some leaders may even retaliate against assessors. (See StrategyDriven Evaluation and Control Best Practice article, Don’t Break the Mirror) Additionally, lead assessors and team members seeking to gain the approval of those executives and managers who may positively influence their careers might themselves be overly concerned about the evaluation’s messaging.[wcm_restrict plans=”47837, 25542, 25653″]

Lead assessors and team members frequently respond to leadership’s adverse reaction or their personal ambitions by softening the tone of their business performance assessment reports. In extreme cases, they may even alter the report’s perspective in order to please management. Such action greatly diminishes the assessment’s value; robbing the organization of opportunities to improve. While not all inclusive, the four lists below, Process-Based Warning Flags, Process Execution Warning Flags – Behaviors, Potential, Observable Results, and Potential Causes, provide insight as to whether self assessment reports are being erroneously adjusted to accommodate personnel desires rather than reflecting actual performance. Only after a problem is recognized and its causes identified can the needed actions be taken to move the organization toward improved performance.

Process-Based Warning Flags

• Business performance assessment process does not ensure significant independence of the assessment team, particularly the lead assessor, from those executives and managers whose area of responsibility is being evaluated
• Executive sponsors can be those whose area of responsibility is being assessed
• Business performance assessment guidelines allow management to alter the final report’s wording irrespective of the evaluation team’s input
• Assessment guidelines allow for nondescript phraseology
• Assessment procedures drive qualitative over quantitative analysis
• No mechanism is in place to protect assessors from retaliatory action
• No mechanism exists to allow assessment team members to provide feedback on the evaluation process and final report, particularly anonymous feedback

Process Execution Warning Flags – Behaviors

• Lead assessors and team members omit information that may, in their perception, make their superiors look bad
• Lead assessors and team members promote the performance of those superiors who participate in their performance evaluations and promotion decisions
• Executives and senior managers silently mistreat assessment team members, including the withholding of feedback, job assistance, and future assignments; particularly those hindering the employee’s development and advancement
• Executives and senior managers levy personal attacks against the individual(s) making the report, with or without the person being present, when the assessment findings are less than flattering (see StrategyDriven article, Warning Flag – ad hominem: Personal, Not Issue Attacks)
• Executives and senior managers commit open reprisals against the assessment participants, including poor performance ratings, withholding pay raises and promotions, reassignment, demotions, and terminations

Potential, Observable Results

• Business performance assessment findings are typically ‘happy and glad’ (See StrategyDriven Business Performance Assessment Program Warning Flag article, Identifying Mostly Strengths
• Business performance assessments result in only incremental improvements leading to slow/stalled performance improvement
• Organizational performance falls behind that of competitors

Potential Causes

• Insecure leaders demand positive performance reports for their area of responsibility
• Executives and managers do not understand or appreciate the tremendous value of an effective business performance assessment program
• Executives and managers are more concerned about their individual success than that of the organization
• Lead assessors and team members are more concerned about their individual success than that of the organization
• Lead assessors and team members prioritize pleasing the boss over improving the organization
• Lead assessors and team members believe that making the boss look good will help advance their career

[/wcm_restrict][wcm_nonmember plans=”47837, 25542, 25653″]

---

Hi there! Gain access to this article with a StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription or buy access to the article itself.

Subscribe to the StrategyDriven Insights Library Sign-up now for your StrategyDriven Insights Library – Total Access subscription for as low as $15 / month (paid annually). Subscribe Now! Not sure? Click here to learn more.

Buy the Article Don’t need a subscription? Buy access to Business Performance Assessment Program Warning Flag 6 – Massaging the Message for the Boss for just $2! Access the Article Now!

[/wcm_nonmember]

---

About the Author

Nathan Ives is a StrategyDriven Principal and Host of the StrategyDriven Podcast. For over twenty years, he has served as trusted advisor to executives and managers at dozens of Fortune 500 and smaller companies in the areas of management effectiveness, organizational development, and process improvement. To read Nathan’s complete biography, click here.