Developing a Successful Feedback and Performance Reviews Process
In today’s dynamic workplace, traditional performance reviews often fall short of providing a well-rounded perspective on an employee’s performance. This makes it increasingly difficult for companies to assess their employees’ efforts and plan the future of their human capital growth and overall people succession. For organizations in the growth phase, it becomes more important than ever to ensure that the feedback processes and mechanisms being implemented are effective and impactful. At Bay Street HR, we run into several different organizations that are looking to continue developing their high-performing employees while guiding them to professional success and ensuring the growth of their overall business. Below are some trends that we noticed in small to mid-sized businesses when it comes to feedback and performance review processes. Simple Processes – We’re seeing a big shift from the numerous pages of performance review documents to one to two pages that focus on the feedback and growth plan for each team member. Setting Expectations Early – Primarily and likely the most important step is laying a groundwork of open and clear expectations for all employees. Settings goals, targets and expectations at the onset save a lot of headaches and difficult conversations with employees later about their performance. Start with a Competencies Matrix – A document that outlines the growth of levels within the firm, the skills and competencies associated with each level and a typical timeframe of achieving each level in order to move on to the next. It’s important to ensure that the skills are broad and encompass not only technical abilities but also firm initiatives and team and leadership skills. Collection of 360 Feedback (at all levels) – Incorporating feedback from various team members across different departments ensures a wholesome approach to the process. 360-degree feedback systems which gather insights from multiple sources, provide a more comprehensive view of performance and help reduce bias in evaluations. While technical skills are important to evaluate and grow, a team member’s leadership, communication and collaboration skills need to also be assessed to have a well-rounded professional in the role. This also means collecting upward feedback for the senior team members of the organization – everyone should be receiving honest and constructive feedback. Moving Away from the Quantitative Ratings – Ratings in performance reviews have become cumbersome, difficult to allocate, and at times meaningless on a grander scale. Firms are now minimizing giving ratings for every skill and competency. Instead, firms are being mindful of providing thoughtful qualitative feedback about a team member’s performance. Focus on Development – To continue motivating and advancing your team members, a large focus has been placed on producing meaningful plans that specify how individuals can continue to grow. Looking backward is important for learning, but don’t forget the forward-looking plan to ensure growth within the team. Integration of Technology – Utilizing online tools such as an HRIS is increasingly becoming more popular. We noticed our smaller clients leaning toward an electronic review process to minimize long paper trails to provide feedback in real time. Consistency – How easy is it to think about punting the performance review process at the end of the fiscal year, especially when there are ‘more pressing’ tasks that need to be completed first? While this might be a tempting thought, just know that as with anything, you won’t see the results that you want from your team members until you put in the consistent effort to deliver feedback. Keep a simple process if needed, but ensure it occurs at the same time annually or semi-annually. Changing timelines or delaying the process shows that your team’s growth and development aren’t that important to the firm. Too busy at year-end? No problem, move the robust feedback process to mid-year, with a smaller touch point at year-end – but give the feedback process the attention that it deserves. At any time of the performance review process, whether you are starting a new one from scratch, making minor adjustments to your current one, or completely re-inventing your ‘out of date’ process – know that it is worth the added effort to take your time and not try to do it all at once. Having a lighter process one year and then adding more rigor to the process next year will guarantee a higher success rate than trying to implement everything at once. It also takes time for team members to adjust and trust the new process – know what works well for your organization and push to move that forward first. Bay Street HR has over 20 years of experience in tailoring and customizing performance review and feedback processes for many different organizations in various industries. Written by: Maha Masood, Partner, Consultant
Candidates Using AI in the Screening Process
The rise of AI tools is transforming various aspects of HR. Still, it poses new challenges, particularly when candidates rely heavily on AI to enhance their applications during the screening process. AI-generated cover letters, résumés, and interview responses are becoming more common, leaving HR professionals, recruiters and hiring managers to navigate between legitimate candidate efforts and AI-generated content. Some of these unique challenges include: 1. Assessing Authenticity How much of a candidate’s application is their work? With AI tools like ChatGPT or resume generators, candidates can create well-structured, polished applications with minimal effort and thought. While AI-generated content often looks impressive, it doesn’t always reflect the applicant’s true skills or qualifications. This creates a challenge in distinguishing between a candidate’s genuine experience and AI-enhanced embellishments. For example, a candidate might submit a highly tailored cover letter that seems perfect on paper, however during interviews, it becomes clear that they lack the depth of knowledge suggested in the application. This disconnect can lead to frustration and disappointment. 2. Evaluating Communication Skills Traditionally, a candidate’s writing — whether in a resume, cover letter, or email — offers insights into their communication skills, attention to detail, and professionalism. With AI tools capable of generating error-free, articulate responses, it becomes increasingly difficult to reliably gauge these attributes. Candidates who may not have strong writing skills can now submit AI-enhanced documents that hide their weaknesses. In roles where communication and thinking on your feet are critical, this could lead to misaligned hires. HR professionals and hiring managers must find new ways to evaluate a candidate’s abilities, relying less on initial written materials and more on real-time communication during the screening process. 3. Interview Preparedness and Genuine Responses AI tools are sophisticated enough to help candidates prepare for interviews by generating answers to common interview questions or simulating mock interviews. Some candidates are capable of discretely using an AI tool in virtual interviews that listen to questions asked in real time and generate a response in seconds. While preparation is important, over-reliance on AI can result in candidates delivering overly rehearsed or generic answers. Interviewers may find it difficult to assess a candidate’s problem-solving abilities, adaptability, or creative thinking if their responses are unoriginal and scripted, or worse yet – identical to other candidates, who are also using AI tools. 4. Ethics and Fairness As candidates increasingly use AI tools to gain an advantage, there’s a growing concern about fairness. Not all candidates have access to or choose to use AI tools, creating a potential disparity in the recruitment process. While some may leverage AI to craft impeccable applications, others who rely solely on their efforts might be at a disadvantage, even if they are equally or more qualified for the role. Conclusion AI is becoming more integrated into a candidate’s application process. While it serves as a valuable tool, it muddies the waters between genuine candidate effort and AI-generated content. To navigate this evolving landscape, HR professionals, recruiters, and hiring managers may need to adjust their testing and evaluation methods to ensure a fair process for all. Written by: Tiffany Leung, Partner, Consultant