While employers pull back on business practices that push the dial forward, like the remote work and flexibility that was offered during the pandemic, there are other stubborn traditions that Corporate America should rid itself of. Standards like the annual performance review, reference checks and exit interviews should be abolished, as they are all farcical and problematic.
Annual Performance Review
There is an inherent power imbalance between managers and employees in traditional one-on-one sit-downs, especially when it comes to annual performance reviews. In these situations, employers always have the upperhand. It doesn’t feel like a completely safe space for workers to speak plainly and honestly. Most of the time, it is the supervisor talking at their subordinate, giving the employee room to speak only when asked to defend a mistake, err in judgment or poor performance. Rather than eradicate performance reviews completely, employers should focus on strategies that are productive, collaborative and conducive to open dialogue, lending to more meaningful and equitable communication and mitigating the power dynamic between managers and workers.
An alternative would be implementing performance management into the organizational structure. This affords employees the opportunity to have more of a say in establishing goals, setting work expectations and planning tasks and projects. Instead of it being a one-time, annual meeting, performance management is a continual process that involves frequent communication so there are no surprises when it comes to how a worker is doing. With routine performance monitoring, employees have the chance to improve upon areas where they are not meeting expectations.
Another option would be incorporating speak-truth-to-power meetings, which are sessions in which employees have the floor to speak candidly, expressing concerns or offering suggestions for improvement, without fear of retribution from their direct manager. The meetings are conducted by the supervisor’s boss, which is why they are referred to as “skip-level.”
A less informal method would be “management by wandering around.” This approach involves managers spontaneously interacting with employees to observe their day-to-day and check in on status reports. Similarly, walking meetings, coffee or breakfast meetings provide a more casual setting for discussions, which can be helpful for topics like constructive feedback or professional goals. Encouraging organic communication and gatherings can be an alternative to formal meetings, fostering a more engaged and collaborative workforce.
Two Weeks’ Notice
If your offer letter explicitly states that you are an “at will” employee, that means that you could be laid off at any time. Whether it’s a corporate reorganization to cut costs or the boss just doesn’t think you are living up to expectations, you can be let go immediately.
Meanwhile, a two-week or more notice is considered mandatory if you want to leave of your own volition. How is it fair that you are held prisoner to a company that would have no qualms about letting you on the spot?
This concept also doesn’t make sense. You tender your resignation, but you must sit around for a few weeks, as management usually pushes you to stay longer to help out.
Companies are taking a big risk keeping the person who quit around. While there are good and decent folks, there are also malcontented people who seek vengeance for the bad treatment they received while working at the organization.
This person could share proprietary information to competitors, steal client lists, destroy property or cause other mischief. It would be safer for leadership just to let the person leave after a day or two of clearing their desks, saying goodbye and handing off work assignments to the remaining team.
The Exit Interview
Another standard practice that hasn’t changed in decades is the exit interview. When a person tenders their resignation, the worker is called into human resources for a conversation.
The HR representative—and sometimes the hiring manager or other executive—will politely inquire why you are leaving.
This sounds non-threatening, yet it’s fraught with peril. The departing employee is in a bind.
If the person who resigned cites instances of discrimination, unfair treatment, a toxic work environment or inappropriate activities, it could open the door for an investigation into these allegations.
Telling the truth about the reasons for quitting will possibly subject their manager, senior-level executives, co-workers and the company to scrutiny, audits and internal reviews of their behaviors.
The backlash would cause the people at the company to never offer a reference or letter of recommendation to the person because of what they said upon leaving.
Sadly, it’s a no-win situation for the person. The employee feels forced to say nice things about everyone and the company, so as not to burn bridges.
For the most part, the exit interview is performative and doesn’t lend itself to an honest discussion that adds value. Rather, it could cause a lot of future challenges for the worker who naively answers the questions truthfully.
Reference Checks And Recommendations
References and recommendations are mostly nonsense. Nearly all businesses ask for one to three or more references when applying and interviewing for a new job, but these hold little value.
The reality is that the applicant will seek out only those professionals who will say positive, flattering and overly kind things about them. It’s an open secret that everyone helps each other out in this aspect of the job search.
Few people would say anything negative when asked to submit a reference. If that happens, the candidate would cast it aside and choose another person to write a reference. The result is that the company receives questionable references that may not be wholly accurate and are tilted in favor of helping out a work friend. Nevertheless, employers pretend that the reference checks are legitimate, which checks off another box on the interviewing to-do list, and have some cover if the newly hired person turns out to be a dud.
Source: Forbes
