Authored by Dr. Culbert (2012), the current article Get Rid of Performance Review! is a business article published by The Wall Street Journal. The author is a consultant and a management professor at the UCLA Anderson School of Management situated in Los Angeles. The author is qualified to writing the current article because he is well conversant with an array of issues aligned with management in the business context.
The current article was written with the sole intent of elucidating the discrepancies associated with performance reviews. As such, the article seeks to inform human resource management personnel to re-consider the persistent use of performance reviews, which are detrimental in that they limit employee productivity and creativity. The article offers seven reasons depicting the discrepancies of performance reviews, which accrues as the main material used by the author to achieve the articles objectives. The article differs from other materials addressing the topic of performance reviews because it does not only focus on the limitations of performance reviews. The article also offers substitutes that can be utilized in place of performance reviews.
The central thesis supported by Culbert (2012) article is that performance reviews are a hindrance to employee creativity and productivity. The thesis is stated concisely, whereby the author utilizes seven reasons expounding on the various reasons as to why performance reviews are skewed to suit the interest of managers at the expense of the subordinates. The articles assumptions and notions are not biased in that they are objective as evidenced by the fact that they revolve on the reasons why performance reviews are not of much value towards an organizations or businesses progress and success.
As previously connoted herein, Culbert (2012) provides concise notions supporting his position that performance reviews are not essential. More importantly, the article notes that performance reviews are based on managers and subordinates notions, which are different. Therefore, the differing notions of the manager and the subordinate are skewed for each other; hence, elicit tensions, which hinder collaboration between them. Secondly, the notion that performance reviews determine employee remuneration are not true because remuneration is guided by prevailing market trends and organizations budget. On another note, performance reviews are often termed objective, whereas they are subjective. Reviewers or managers base their reviews on unreliable information such as anonymous feedback, whose authenticity cannot be guaranteed. In addition, performance reviews are not constructive because they utilize a similar structure to evaluate different employees, whose capabilities are different. The unconstructive nature of performance reviews is further accredited to the fact that they do not enhance the professional growth of employees. In most cases, performance reviews instill fear among the employees; hence, making them develop the fear to approach their managers for support and mentorship. In the quest to create a positive perception amongst themselves, performance reviews make the employees engage in cover-up activities that portray them positively (Baker, 2013).
The current article does not refute its arguments. Instead, the author provides an alternative that would help resolve his arguments against performance reviews. In a nutshell, Culbert (2012) article does not merely sham the use of performance reviews. As such, the author suggests that performance previews should replace performance reviews. In most cases, performance reviews offer a platform through which managers can hold employees accountable for their actions and results. Use of performance reviews intimidates employees and forces them to produce results and actions that please their managers. On the contrary, performance previews allow managers and subordinates to develop and improve skills that can guarantee the attainment of the companys needs and goals (Baker, 2013).
In conclusion, the current article appeals in that it utilizes passion and humor to devise insights that encourage managers to adopt ways of improving employee skills as opposed to criticizing their actions and results. The author uses an authoritative, humorous tone, which enhances his credibility.
Baker, T. (2013). The end of the performance review: A new approach to appraising employee performance.
Culbert, S. (2012). Get Rid of the Performance Review!. The Wall Street Journal, 1-6.
If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SuperbGrade website, please click below to request its removal:
- Verizon Communications Inc.
- The Evolution of Asset Prices Given Todays Hyper-Regulatory Environment
- Cost of Equity for Nike Using Both the CAPM
- Sabarnes-Oxley vs PCAOB
- Bank of America vs. David Caulkett Case
- Leadership Function in the Banking Industry
- Debt Crisis and Options for Development Strategy