Answers to tricky HR questions: Should HR sit in on bad performance reviews?
November 14, 2008 by Jim GiulianoPosted in: Answers to tricky HR questions, Behavior, Complaint investigation, Discipline, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, Performance appraisals, policies
Our team of experts fields real-life, everyday questions from HR managers and gives practical answers that can be applied by any HR pro in the same situation. Today’s question: Should someone from HR sit in when an employee is getting a poor performance review?
Question:
Our CEO wants me, the HR manager, to sit in every time a supervisor gives an employee a below-standards performance appraisal. I would serve only as a witness for what’s said – such as agreements about problems and ways to improve.
What do you think about the idea? Should this be an HR function?
Answer
Not a bad idea, answers Jonathan Segal, an employment-law attorney with the firm of Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen.
Maybe, however, you won’t want to limit participation to only the bad reviews. Just sitting in on the bad reviews makes HR look like the Grim Reaper, who only shows up for bad times (such as terminations or disciplinary actions). That’s why you may want to consider sitting in on all reviews. Of course, there are only so many hours in the day, and HR can only do so much, but being at the good reviews, too, would prevent a negative image of HR.
Tags: HR, performance, reviews, Terminations
November 17th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
that would work if it is one location. I have few locations. this needs to be customized.You can not use same blanket answer
November 17th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
Why is the manager waiting until a review to give someone negative feedback? Sub-standards should be addressed immediately with the employee and not at the review. The employee will be completely blind sided and de-moralized. Coaching an employee right away will save everyone time and money!! Besides, why would you want an employee working for you if their performance is below standards? If these issues are addressed immediately, you can either get the poor performer up to standards or replace them with someone who can do the job.
November 17th, 2008 at 4:55 pm
Personally, as the company HR Representative, I would refrain from participating in performance reviews for a number of reasons such as time, perception, etc. But the biggest reason is that HR is often times the only internal resources to turn to when supervisors or employees have disagreements. Remaining neutral allows you to conduct an unbiased review of circumstances and keeps HR a viable resource for the organization.
November 17th, 2008 at 4:58 pm
You can still remain neutral while sitting in on a review. You are only there to witness and to answer any questions the employee may have about how this review will affect their future (if they even have questions).
November 17th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
While I agree with refraining from participating I would disagree with the notion that you can still be neutral while sitting in a review. From the employee’s point of view it would be hard to be neutral if the HR manager is in there for the review. Of course this all depends on the size of the company, company dynamics, etc.
November 17th, 2008 at 5:31 pm
Since time is of the essence during review time, our HR Reps don’t sit in on every review, good or bad. If an employee is performing below standards then the supervisor can put the employee on a performance development plan (PDP) for 3 to 6 months and if they don’t bring their performance up to par by then, that is when our HR Rep goes into a meeting with the employee and supervisor to address the issues before their review.
November 17th, 2008 at 5:33 pm
I will sit in if a manager asks me to. On the other hand, I have had employees ask me to sit in on meetings they request with their managers regarding unfavorable reviews. I think if you have a good relationship with your staff they will understand that you are there not only to protect the company, but to make sure that they as employees are dealt with fairly as well. Although I am certainly loyal to my organization, I have no problem sticking up for an employee if I feel they are being mistreated. I am fortunate to have a small enough company that it has allowed me to form good working relationships with all my staff, however.
November 17th, 2008 at 5:50 pm
I agree with Gary. Coach and train the managers to conduct the reviews. They could have someone one else from the management team sit in. As HR, you are the neutral party. You can certainly function as a mediator or even negotiator. Even if you are just sitting in on the reivew. Natural human nature will allow the employee to assume that you, as a representative of the Company, agree with the manager’s assessment of their performance. If they can not come to you, then unfortunately they have no where else to turn but some other outside agency.
November 17th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Managers are not good at delivering bad news no matter how much training they receive. the HR presence will help clarify what is expected of the employee, as to what improvements must be made in performance, attendance, etc., what the organization will do to help, the time frame for results to be seen and the consequences if improvement has not been made. This relays the message that the organization means business and is committed to improving performance or replacing the employee. It is the last step before termination and it should be done with an HR professional present. Anyone who says they don’t have the time is shirking their job responsibility as an HR professional to the employee and the organization.
November 17th, 2008 at 7:47 pm
I would recommend that the CEO include the employee’s Manager/Supervisor as the witness. I would also offer to go over the below-standards performance appraisal with the CEO to ensure it is consistent with company standards and that it will be communicated effectively. This is a perfect opportunity to provide some coaching for the CEO on the delivery of appraisals, especially those that are less than positive. In some cases, the delivery of these types’ appraisals is as important as the information that will be shared with the employee.
November 17th, 2008 at 8:07 pm
Agree with Sarah 11/17… Sometimes Supervisors do a just-to-get-it-out-of-the-way performance review. They hate the fact that HR has to do a pre-view of the review (even when misspelled words and comments that make no sense are found)…they claim to have experience, but a fact is that they don’t even care about the employee but about themselves.
The employees cannot complaint about a supervisor because they are always afraid of loosing their job. I have found out that they do super-reviews of some people and then for those that are really knowledgeable they do nothing good.
November 18th, 2008 at 8:49 am
A part of the manager’s job is to oversee employee performance. Their job is to coach, counsel and discipline if needed. That’s why they are paid what they are paid. If a witness is needed, the manager could always have a supervisor or team leader sit in on the performance review. HR’s role could be to consult with the manager on how to give the review – if the manager has questions.
November 18th, 2008 at 9:15 am
I agree with Sarah. The employee should already have known that a bad review was coming because of the coachings and warnings that they have received during the year.
As the HR Manager of several locations, I pick a day that I am visiting the site to pick an employee to sit in on the review. The supervisor does not even know. All they know is that I sit in on three of the reviews that they give. Sometimes they are the good ones other times, they are not. However, I do have an advantage of knowing beforehand from my staff which employees have received bad reviews.
November 18th, 2008 at 9:44 am
Sarah asks an important question. Why involve HR at this late date. Would not do this myself…casts HR in the light of “enforcer” and there only when there is trouble. Also, gives the manager too easy an “out”. Coach them beforeheand…maybe have another m,anager or supervisor from the department sit in. HR can do a follow up meeting with the manager to debrief and, if necessary, plan next steps.
November 18th, 2008 at 10:46 am
I agree with JR. The content of the review should not be a surprise to the employee; continuous feedback – both positive and/or negative – are part of the managers job duties. If the employee is not performing up to standards they should be put on a PIP (Performance Improvement Plan). If they do not successfully complete the PIP further disciplinary action (which may include termination) should follow. HR should be in the loop as soon as the employee is put on the PIP and remain involved until the situation is satisfactorily resolved or until termination occurs.
November 18th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
I think it is necessary. It gives the employee the opportunity to respond to the bad review. It also lets the employee know that HR approved the review so the employee cannot claim they were being picked on by their manager.
November 19th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
There is some real value to HR sitting in on performance appraisals. While it is time consuming we find we become more familiar with the positions for which we screen applicants. I didn’t really want to do this at first, but I’ve found it to be valuable. I try to assess if things are being understood as the manager and staff member speak. If I think an important point has been made but is glossed over, I’m in a perfect position to ask a clarifying question since no one expects me to know all the workings of the departments.
I believe staff members see me as a neutral party because I behave that way.
January 8th, 2009 at 11:32 am
I believe this site provides a lot of info. and innovation.
I believe reviews are important to learn the pros and cons about oneself and his style of working. If taken positively it will surely add some value to oneself.
http://uttambpt.blogspot.com
(Answers to Interview Questions)
January 8th, 2009 at 11:34 am
I believe this site provides a lot of info. and innovation.
I believe reviews are important to learn the pros and cons about oneself and his style of working. If taken positively it will surely add some value to oneself.
http://uttambpt.blogspot.com
(Answers to Interview Questions)
Thank you
January 12th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Many great thoughts/ideas here. It does depend on the sophistication of the managers though. Too many managers are passive-aggressive and fail to say the difficult things that employees need to hear to improve/direct their performance. Unless you have a truly committed leadership team the Peter Principle prevails.
January 12th, 2009 at 3:35 pm
Many great thoughts/ideas here. It does depend on the sophistication of the managers though. Too many managers are passive-aggressive and fail to say the difficult things that employees need to hear to improve/direct their performance. Unless you have a truly committed leadership team; the Peter Principle prevails.
March 9th, 2009 at 4:30 pm
This is a situation where the “All or Nothing” principal should be applied. If the HR representative only shows up for the bad reviews, then it will quickly become obvious to other personnel when an employee is receiving a bad review. I personally consider this to be a breach of confidentiality, as well as poor etiquette. Employees deserve their privacy, and we should not be giving their co-workers clues as to what their performance evaluations are like. If HR shows up for ALL reviews, then the only clue the other personnel will receive is that SOMEONE is getting a review. Neither good or bad.
July 14th, 2009 at 8:40 am
I agree with Angela and Sarah. Review time is not when an employees poor performance should be addressed for the first time. Poor performance should be addressed and documented throughout the year.
Poor performance should only be addressed during the performance evaluation to evaluate and solidify how successful the employee has been in regards to meeting goals and objectives to rectify poor performance that was addressed throughout the year.
In reference to HR sitting in on bad reviews, I agree with Nikki and Lisa. If HR only sits in on bad reviews, it creates an environment where employees view HR as” the Bad Guys”
There is a direct correlation between employees not trusting HR/Management, employee morale/engagement and unionization. As HR professionals we need to be diligent that we don’t inadvertently create additional problems for ourselves prior to implementing a policy like this.