Does your boss have it out for you? Maybe your supervisor thinks you can do no wrong. Either way, you might think the annual job evaluation is a waste of time, with check-boxes that make no sense and comments that seem off the wall.
Now you have facts to back up your grousing. At Southern Connecticut State University, management professor Paul Stepanovich took a close look at the office evaluation ritual and found not only that they aren’t always effective, but actually make matters worse.
“They generally do much more harm than good,” said Stepanovich, who’s chairman of the management and management information department at SCSU. “They have been criticized forever, yet almost every organization continues to do them.”
Why is that? Probably in part because the lawyers tell the folks in HR, who tell the division chiefs that job evaluations are the legal means companies have for establishing a documented record of employee performance — in case there’s a dispute down the line.
In a paper published in the Journal of Behavioral and Applied Management, Stepanovich said the evals are so biased that they “actually say more about the evaluator” than the employee, SCSU said.
“Those biases are usually unconscious,” Stepanovich said in a written release. “In fact, most supervisors believe they are providing pretty objective evaluations. But the research is clear – they are not.”