The world of work is changing. Many organizations have turned to contract-based, contingent, and gig workers for multiple roles in their routine operations. Last year, the US saw nearly 64 million freelancers, which made up 38% of the workforce. These large-scale shifts in the workforce led to many newfound talent management considerations from an employer’s perspective. So, performance reviews are now more important than ever.  

Part-time and gig workers take a different career approach than regular full-timers. These hires often would have accrued industry experiences from diverse collaborations. Therefore, hiring gig workers also requires patience and understanding. These candidates may be juggling multiple projects simultaneously.

We look at how these workplace dynamics affect the concept and significance of performance reviews. Perhaps more importantly, we’ll find ways to enhance existing talent assessment practices for the modern workforce.  

Performance reviews, or appraisals, are routine assessments of your workforce’s professional conduct and performance. So, these timely reviews can help determine promotions, salary evaluations, redeployment, and training programs. Decision-makers traditionally relied on performance reviews to identify the company’s top performers by systematically evaluating their hard work.

However, contrary to the original intended purposes of these reviews, employees have associated performance reviews with negative experiences.

THESE CONCERNS INCLUDE:

• Companies usually conduct annual reviews or have them bi-yearly in other instances. The long gaps between each assessment period could lead to inaccurate employee ratings. Long breaks between yearly reviews make it hard for bosses to improve training and talent.

• Decision-makers and people managers may include inherent biases in their reviews. And this could shortchange qualified individuals while acknowledging and rewarding others who lack the right competencies to excel in their roles.  

• The “crunch period” toward performance periods could lead to stress and performance anxiety. And this could either motivate employees or discourage them. Either way, the transitory distress could lead to inaccurate estimations of regular workplace performance.

• Preset performance assessment criteria could involve unrealistic targets that demotivate and disengage the workforce. For example, Google revised its performance appraisal policy, anticipating a larger group of employees (2% up to 6% of the workforce) falling into a low-ranking category that warrants corrective action. These could cause large-scale fear and concerns over job security.

‍

Read full article here