Menu
Staff appraisals focus on weaknesses — let’s shift the focus to strengths
Blog //05-08-2015

Staff appraisals focus on weaknesses — let’s shift the focus to strengths

by Advanced PR, Author

When employ­ees think of per­for­mance man­age­ment, they often think of the neg­a­tives — here’s how to build on strengths in the work­place and cre­ate more pro­duc­tive and hap­pi­er employees.

Most employ­ees hate per­for­mance reviews. Per­for­mance man­age­ment itself often suf­fers from a bad rep­u­ta­tion, which is often because organ­i­sa­tions haven’t refined their processes.

Some­times, organ­i­sa­tions become set in their ways and refuse to adapt or embrace new per­for­mance man­age­ment trends. Some­times, com­mu­ni­ca­tion break­down is the prob­lem and infre­quent con­tact dri­ves a wedge between man­age­ment and employ­ee. Anoth­er cru­cial fac­tor is that, more often than not, staff appraisals focus on weak­ness­es over key employ­ee strengths.

Dur­ing tra­di­tion­al behav­iour­al assess­ments or per­for­mance review dis­cus­sions, the empha­sis is placed heav­i­ly on the neg­a­tive — where the employ­ee needs to improve — rather than high­light­ing, and work­ing with, employ­ee strengths. Though this approach may seem sen­si­ble, there’s a lot of research sug­gest­ing that it’s wis­er to con­sid­er what your employ­ees already bring to the table. Accord­ing to a 2019 study from Gallup, only 10.4% of U.S. work­ers felt engaged after receiv­ing neg­a­tive feed­back, and four out of five said they were active­ly or pas­sive­ly look­ing for a new job.

What research tells us about employ­ee strengths and weak­ness­es in per­for­mance appraisals

One of the first stud­ies look­ing at the effect of focus­ing on key strengths and weak­ness­es in per­for­mance reviews was car­ried out by the Cor­po­rate Lead­er­ship Coun­cil (now Gart­ner) in 2002. The sur­vey involv­ed 19,000 employ­ees and man­agers. They found that plac­ing empha­sis on per­for­mance strengths dur­ing for­mal reviews can increase employ­ee per­for­mance by up to 36%. When empha­sis­ing per­son­al­i­ty strengths, per­for­mance improved by up to 21%. Con­verse­ly, the study found that high­light­ing weak­ness­es is a​“per­for­mance killer”, decreas­ing per­for­mance by up to 27%.

Fur­ther research by Gallup found that man­agers who received strengths feed­back showed 12.5% greater pro­duc­tiv­i­ty, and their busi­ness units showed 8.9% greater prof­itabil­i­ty. In 2011, McK­in­sey & Com­pa­ny pub­lished a book, also con­firm­ing that a focus on improv­ing strengths improved per­for­mance much more than when staff appraisals focused on weaknesses.

In more recent research, a 2020 study from Tilburg Uni­ver­si­ty inves­ti­gat­ed the effects of strength-based per­for­mance appraisals, find­ing that those per­for­mance rat­ings focused on strengths were asso­ci­at­ed with stronger moti­va­tion to improve among employ­ees. Strength-based feed­back is a con­tin­u­ous­ly devel­op­ing area of research, with sev­er­al more stud­ies show­ing the ben­e­fits of a strengths-based approach to employ­ee per­for­mance and engagement.

These find­ings give us tremen­dous insight, but if we think about our expe­ri­ences, they shouldn’t come as a sur­prise. We’re all at our most pro­duc­tive when play­ing to our strengths and com­plet­ing tasks we enjoy.

The psy­chol­o­gy of pos­i­tive think­ing and focus­ing on strengths

The father of Pos­i­tive Psy­chol­o­gy, Mar­tin Selig­man, once said that for an indi­vid­ual to be real­ly hap­py and live a mean­ing­ful life, they must first recog­nise their unique strengths. They must then be allowed to use these to con­tribute to some­thing big­ger than them­selves. Research sup­port­ing this state­ment showed that when peo­ple tried using their strengths in new ways each day for just one week, they were hap­pi­er and less depressed six months lat­er. Fur­ther­more, a focus on strengths has been shown to make employ­ees more cre­ative and engaged while they are at work.

How know­ing and using strengths ben­e­fits organisations

In a study by Rigo­ni and Asplund based on data from 1.2 mil­lion employ­ees world­wide, 90% of organ­i­sa­tions using a strengths-based approach report­ed a 9 – 15% increase in employ­ee engage­ment and 14 – 29% increased prof­it. Peo­ple who use their strengths effec­tive­ly are wide­ly report­ed to ben­e­fit from the following:

  • Improved well-being

  • High­er lev­els of motivation

  • Greater pro­fes­sion­al success

  • High­er self-confidence

  • Low­er stress levels

  • Greater job satisfaction

  • Improved rela­tion­ship build­ing at work.

Iden­ti­fy­ing and using employ­ee strengths can only ben­e­fit organ­i­sa­tions, mak­ing them stronger and more high­ly per­form­ing than their com­peti­tors. When a work­force is encour­aged to play to its strengths, it becomes ener­gised, moti­vat­ed, and effective.

Incor­po­rat­ing a strengths- based approach into your per­for­mance man­age­ment system

We know from research that focus­ing on strengths in per­for­mance dis­cus­sions is like­ly to yield bet­ter results, but how can this be achieved in prac­tice? Here are five prac­ti­cal ways to incor­po­rate strengths in your per­for­mance man­age­ment processes:

  • Strength-focused man­age­ment train­ing — When train­ing man­agers in per­for­mance man­age­ment skills, empha­sise the impor­tance of iden­ti­fy­ing and active­ly devel­op­ing their team mem­bers’ strengths dur­ing per­for­mance dis­cus­sions, rather than act­ing as “‘judge and critic”.

  • Inform man­agers about the pos­i­tive to neg­a­tive feed­back ratio — Pro­vide guid­ance to all man­agers on the impor­tance of giv­ing reg­u­lar pos­i­tive feed­back and how to cor­rect­ly bal­ance it with con­struc­tive feed­back. Research sug­gests that the bal­ance of pos­i­tive praise to con­struc­tive feed­back should be around 3:1. Addi­tion­al­ly, if you are using a more for­mal 360 feed­back exer­cise (e.g. to sup­port coach­ing con­ver­sa­tions), place greater empha­sis on the areas in which the indi­vid­ual is strong and how those strengths can be utilised. Focus less on their weaknesses.

  • Lever­age skills in per­son­al devel­op­ment plans — Ask your employ­ees to con­sid­er how they can fur­ther devel­op and lever­age their exist­ing strengths when plan­ning their per­son­al devel­op­ment needs.

  • Con­sid­er strengths dur­ing the objec­tive set­ting phase — When set­ting objec­tives, ask employ­ees and their man­agers to think about what projects or ini­tia­tives the employ­ee could under­take that would play to their strengths.

  • Con­tem­plate employ­ee key strengths dur­ing role design — Encour­age man­agers to think about how respon­si­bil­i­ties and tasks can be best allo­cat­ed between their team mem­bers to utilise their indi­vid­ual strengths.

How to iden­ti­fy strengths

Although every­one has strengths, it’s com­mon for employ­ees to have trou­ble iden­ti­fy­ing them. A person’s strengths may come so nat­u­ral­ly that they don’t realise them, so man­agers must sup­port their teams to recog­nise and appre­ci­ate their unique qualities.

To suc­cess­ful­ly focus on strengths, we must first recog­nise them. Man­agers will gain an insight into their team mem­bers’ strengths by using a per­for­mance man­age­ment tool that col­lates reg­u­lar third-par­­­ty feed­back. For a more in-depth analy­sis, the Clifton­Strengths Assess­ment is a well-respec­t­ed and rel­a­tive­ly low-cost tool for iden­ti­fy­ing strengths. It can be pur­chased online and is also includ­ed in the excel­lent book, StrengthsFind­er 2.0.

Reg­u­lar dis­cus­sions with employ­ees about their strengths will also help them pay clos­er atten­tion to what they’re par­tic­u­lar­ly good at. Con­tin­u­ous feed­back can help work­ers recog­nise their strengths and apply them more effec­tive­ly to their work.

How should weak­ness­es be addressed?

If organ­i­sa­tions and man­age­ment teams should be focus­ing on strengths, does that mean we should ignore weak­ness­es? Put sim­ply, no. There is a place for dis­cussing employ­ee strengths and weak­ness­es, but weak­ness­es should not become the pri­ma­ry focus in per­for­mance and feed­back dis­cus­sions, as is cur­rent­ly too often the case.

Where the employ­ee is underper­form­ing, weak­ness­es will need to be addressed, and these dis­cus­sions remain a help­ful devel­op­ment tool. How­ev­er, it is impor­tant to be real­is­tic about how far a weak­ness can be over­come. There are some things that peo­ple will sim­ply nev­er be good at, no mat­ter how hard they try, so ask­ing them to improve in these areas is like­ly to be a fruit­less exer­cise and high­ly demotivating.

Instead, in cas­es of underper­for­mance, man­agers should think about whether the employee’s role could be restruc­tured to make bet­ter use of their strengths and real­lo­cate work to oth­er, bet­ter-suit­­­ed team mem­bers where pos­si­ble. It’s nor­mal for there to be a range of indi­vid­ual strengths and weak­ness­es with­in a team, and the key is to make the most of these to ben­e­fit your organ­i­sa­tion. Allow­ing for flex­i­bil­i­ty con­cern­ing job roles and func­tions will result in hap­pi­er, more engaged and more high­ly moti­vat­ed employees.

If you’re look­ing to over­haul your per­for­mance man­age­ment sys­tem and imple­ment strength-based reviews, find out how our lead­ing per­for­mance man­age­ment soft­ware can help you do it. Book a free demo of Clear Review today, and our expert team will help you boost pro­duc­tiv­i­ty and engagement.

Implement Strength-Based Reviews With Our Innovative Performance Management Software

Blog Clear Review Human Resource Blog
Advanced PR

Advanced PR

PUBLISHED BY

Author

Our press team, delivering thought leadership and insightful market analysis.

Read published articles