Staff refusing to accept feedback- what to do??

[JoL]

I was recently required to give feedback to staff members regarding their work performance. These reviews were done with another manager a few levels above me, and the input of 4-5 different managers/supervisors was taken into consideration for each person.

 

I have never had to give feedback in a formal situation before, because at my level in my organisation, it is generally not expected- except in my department. My manager who was running the feedback session did most of the talking and explaining, but I was present too and provided some input.

 

During and after these interviews I was shocked at how oppositional and arugmentative a couple of people were about being given constructive criticism...

 

Is this human nature?

 

We had a staff member who got "excellent ratings" for all areas and a "good" rating for only 1 area, and this person started arguing, debating and not even listening to our reasons for giving that rating in that particular area. We have also had to give feedback to staff who have had ongoing issues that have been raised many times in the past ...but they cannot for the life of them understand why we would rate them as needing development.

 

I know when I am told I need to work on something I listen intently and ask for suggestions as I believe there is ALWAYS room for improvement in SOMETHING.

And this is what I explained to ALL the staff, we cannot give staff 5/5 for something that they can still improve.

 

I can respect that staff want to understand why ratings are given and what caused a lower rating- but these staff members shocked me in their opposition and refusal to accept that they need to SLIGHTLY improve ONE thing..! The reason we point these things out is so they are more likely to be successful when applying for promotions. We want our staff to be as competitive in our organisation as possible.

 

I have been quite upset by this as I feel they are not understanding why certain rankings are given for certain things.

Is there any way to approach this to have both sides understand eachother better? Should I just let it go, or should I wait for them to come to me if they want to talk this through further?

 

What is a budding supervisor meant to do? I am still a newbie at this and I feel a bit lost...!

[robowarrior]

In context its very normal, they have babies to feed at home, a wife and family to support, anything that will bring that security into danger like low job ratings will be argued and fought with till death follows. I mean job policy is one thing, people's lives are another. Staff feels they can lose their job thru this, even if its not true, imagine in a bad period what will happen. Boss: oh this person has a low job rating , lets kick him/her out.

 

I think you simply do not have the maturity in terms of job experience to understand why people fight for their lives, but you soon will understand if not understood already.

[avman]

Most people are naturally defensive about their performance. I've had to deliver news like this before as well and I would say 75% of my staff had reacted similarly. The ones who wanted the feedback and used it constructively were usually the ones that I didn't have to worry about anyway - they were already doing a good job and the feedback was really meant to take them to the next level and get them ready for promotion.

 

Let this sink in with the staff for a week or two. Fresh news sometimes needs to be absorbed for awhile before people are really ready to accept it. Then bring them in one by one for a regular status update. As part of it, ask them if they have any questions about their review and then let them vent. You'll be able to tell the ones that now have absorbed it and are ready to work to incorporate the feedback from those who will not accept it.

 

Those who are ready to move forward will have some direct questions for you. Give them direct answers. Give examples of how to improve their performance... "Jim, to improve your accuracy in your work how about having another team member that you trust review it before you submit it."

 

Hope this helps.

[Scout]

The reason we point these things out is so they are more likely to be successful when applying for promotions. We want our staff to be as competitive in our organisation as possible.

 

Is that really fostering a secure work environment by encouraging everyone to be as competitive as possible against each other? If this is really a firmly entrenched policy at your organization, I can see why people get very anxious about their "ratings."

[Scout]

Having multiple higher ups during the feedback session can make an employee feel like they are being tag-teamed...Even constructive criticism that comes from more than 1 person automatically makes one defensive.

 

That's a very good point. If I was facing a team of people telling me how I could "improve" and giving me my "ratings," I would hardly feel like I'm in a constructive environment. Sounds very nerve-wracking.

[kellbell]

"Having multiple higher ups during the feedback session can make an employee feel like they are being tag-teamed..."

 

This is what I thought too. Usually when I have a review it is with my immediate supervisor and my Principle Investigator. Not a whole bunch of higher-ups all at once. I am good, responsible, dependable employee and willing to improve. But I probably would have been defensive and apprehensive as well if a bunch of big-wigs all at once told me what I stink at and need to improve. It is all about the approach and how you present such matters, especially employee reviews.

 

I am sure the more responsible employees will take to the constructive critisism and take it to heart and improve. But some people just don't get it, and those are going to be the most resisitant.

 

Perhaps next time when the reviews come around, do it in a more discreet manner with only a few people presenting it. Sure, a bunch of people can get togther and do the reviews and offer what needs to be improved but only have a few relevent people present during the actual review process.

 

Hope this helps.

[Scout]

I wouldn't even suggest more than one person handling the review. That one-to-one feedback is a lot easier to take.

[Scout]

Jol, I do want to acknowledge that you obviously care about your staff, or this wouldn't be upsetting to you. So, my apologies for not mentioning that right off the bat.

 

Let me ask you something, though. Do you think they would take feedback more constructively if there weren't ratings attached to it, just your feedback? Something about the ratings thing reminds me of tests and grades. No one wants to feel like their job is similar to being in school again. Remember how you felt when you thought you aced a test, and then your feeling of shock when you got back a "C"? And then you got discouraged about your performance in that class. It's probably the same feeling.

[Scout]

I've actually never worked for a company that had a performance rating system. I didn't realize this was such a common thing, and I've had lots of jobs, lol.

[avman]

I've actually never worked for a company that had a performance rating system. I didn't realize this was such a common thing, and I've had lots of jobs, lol

 

Every company I have worked for also had this in some fashion. Usually people are ranked on a scale from 1-5 or so with a 3 being "Meets Standard" or some other phrase meaning you are at expectations.

[now_better]

Every company I have worked for also had this in some fashion. Usually people are ranked on a scale from 1-5 or so with a 3 being "Meets Standard" or some other phrase meaning you are at expectations.

 

worked at 3 companies since i've graduated and stayed at 2 long enough to get reviews. very similar: 1-5 scale.

 

i agree w/ the above posters. some people are more willing to accept constructive criticism than others. if they're not, there's not much you can do to help those people as its their personality.

[JoL]

Thank you for your replies everyone.

 

First off I'd like to clear up something I wasn't very clear on in my first post- the feedback was being provided by only myself, and another manager. Other managers had input into the ratings but only 2 people are present during the feedback session.

 

What is really surprising is that staff who have been performing exceptionally well have been given ideas on how to perform even BETTER and they have bitten our heads off.

 

As these staff are contract temporary staff, in the beginning of the meeting before any other thing, we told them that we are overall happy with their performance and we would like to keep them until x date, which they were all very hapy with. But as soon as the feedback was given, they had arguments for everything.

 

I personally hate the 1-5 rating system as well, but I am just doing MY job as best i can...

 

I know I am not an experienced supervisor which is why I guess why this upsets me!