For many companies, performance review season is kicking off with the new year. Although every organization relies on a different evaluation process, most follow a predictable pattern: First, they invite employees to write about their accomplishments and what they need to improve. Then managers write assessments of their work, offer feedback, and rate their performance on a scale of how well they met expectations.
Why Most Performance Evaluations Are Biased, and How to Fix Them
Avoid open-ended questions.
January 11, 2019
Daniel Grill/Getty Images
Summary.
Most performance evaluations follow a predictable pattern: They invite employees to write about their accomplishments and what they need to improve, and then managers write assessments of their employees’ performance. But while managers may strive to be as meritocratic as possible, our assessments are imperfect and all too often biased. As innocuous as the typical form may seem, research has found that it often allows for our implicit biases to creep in. The problem is the “open box.” Most forms ask managers broad questions about their employees, and offer a blank space that managers can fill with assessments, advice, and criticisms as they see fit. But when the context and criteria for making evaluations are ambiguous, bias is more prevalent. Fortunately, researchers have also shown that individuals can take actions to reduce that ambiguity and be more objective when filling in the open box.