1. TURNING PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK INTO POSITIVE EMPLOYEE ENGAGEMENT Monthly Webinar Series February 4, 2016

2. 2 Topic Agenda ItemTime (min) Introduction/Why the Topic?5 Performance Feedback and Employee Engagement 10 The Trend in Performance Appraisals: Some Case Examples 10 Lessons Learned5 Q&A5 Norm Baillie-David SVP Engagement - TalentMap Monica Helgoth VP Engagement - Western Region Agenda

3. 3 15 years in business 7,000+ employee engagement surveys since inception 1,000,000+ employees surveyed 500+ employee engagement surveys annually Only 1 Focus TalentMap by the Numbers

4. 4 Sample Clients & Benchmark Award ProgramsTechnology & EngineeringNot-for-Profit & Association Financial Services Health Sciences Other

5. Why the Topic?

6. PRIORITIZING OPPORTUNITIES: WHERE DOES PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK FALL? Improving engagement should be focused on dimensions exhibiting a combination of low performance scores and strong drivers Focusing on the lower dimension scores exclusively may not fully address what is needed to target and improve engagement “Maintain: Keep doing well” “Leverage & Expand” “Medium/ Low priority” High Performance Low Performance Weak Driver of Engagement Strong Driver of Engagement High need for improvement coupled with powerful drivers of engagement Opportunities For Improvement 6

7. EXAMPLE 1: HIGHEST CLIENT IN BENCHMARK 7

8. EXAMPLE CLIENT 2: PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK AS OPPORTUNITY AREA 8 Strong Engagement Driver Weak Engagement Driver

9. 271 respondents selected a theme for this comment How could your performance feedback be improved? PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK: COMMENTS 9 “The performance appraisal process can be improved by bringing back the 5 tiered measurement. No additional pay increase but it really changes the morale of appraisals. As it stands now, you are either in the 90% of workers or the 10% exceptional. If you bring back the middle zone, it will help the morale of those that do work hard.” “Less negative feedback, balance it with positive feedback. “ “Performance evaluation / feedback is done at the very last minute, right at the deadline. The process has little value. Continuous, less formal feedback would be much better”

10. EXAMPLE : MORE TYPICAL CLIENT – AVERAGE ENGAGEMENT 10 Not perceived well, but not enough of a driver to focus on as priority

11. -6 -16 -17 -13 -20 -8 -9 -18 PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK 11 Data is rounded to the nearest whole number * Number indicates % Favourable score +/- CLIENT 2014* +/- TM Benchmark

12.  Source: TalentMap text analytics PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK – KEY THEMES 12

13.  Example weak negative: “It seems like the evaluation process is just a formality…... The periodic one-on-one chats with my manager are more constructive….Also, often the goals that are set are so far ahead in time that when it comes time to compare accomplishments against the goals list, it just looks bad because the goals weren't met, but it's not like we just sat around twiddling our thumbs, we were working on other stuff (deemed more important by management).” PERFORMANCE FEEDBACK – SENTIMENT ANALYSIS 13

14. ENGAGES AND MOTIVATES (Very) Frequent feedback Informal conversations Informal recognition Avoiding rating scales Conversations focus more on future, less on past DISENGAGES AND DISCOURAGES Annual review (with few or no conversations) Ranking and percentile methods (e.g. top 10%, median, etc.) Rating scales which are seen as limiting, arbitrary and/or subjective Conversations focus on past performance Emphasis on “strengths” and “weaknesses” SUMMARY: WHAT WORKS, WHAT DOESN’T? 14

15. HIGHLY ENGAGED ORGANIZATIONS ARE DROPPING THE ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW 15 Source: Quantum Workplace – The State of Employee Feedback

16. 1:1s RANKED #1 COMMUNICATION STRATEGY 16 Source: Quantum Workplace – The State of Employee Feedback

17. DEVELOPMENTS AND “BEST PRACTICE” EXAMPLES 17

18. The GE Example 18

19.  Teams and departments were focused on their own objectives – resulting in entrenched siloes  Annual objectives couldn’t keep pace with changing demands OBSERVATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS DRIVING CHANGE 19 Remember this?

20.  Managers and their direct reports hold regular, informal “touchpoints” where they set or update priorities that are based on customer needs  Conversations are documented using specialized app (including voice recording – so no extra effort required)  Development is forward looking and ongoing; managers coach rather than critique; suggestions can come from anyone in an employee’s network. THE GE SOLUTION/APPROACH 20 Source: GE’s Real-Time Performance Development by Leonardo Baldassarre and Brian Finken August 12, 2015 Harvard Business Review

21.  We’re (also) learning a new vocabulary, dispensing with sticky labels like “strengths” and “weaknesses ”.  “We focus instead on behaviors employees may want to “continue” as well as changes they may want to “consider” making. This new vocabulary focuses our teams less on backward looking feedback and more on forward-looking actions. It frames feedback in a positive way.”  “The shift from “command and control” to “empower and inspire” is dramatic, and, as evidenced by our fivefold increase in productivity, it is yielding significant benefits for our employees and customers.” WHAT THE GE CONVERSATIONS LOOK LIKE: 21

22. 22 “ As managers, we need to be more vulnerable and show our teams we are growing to give them the license to do the same ”

23. The Deloitte Example 23 Source: Reinventing Performance Management by Marcus Buckingham and Ashley Goodall Harvard Business Review, April 2015

24. 1.Survey of executives shows 58% don’t believe their current approach drives either engagement, nor performance 2. Existing approach had little impact on future performance (performance rarely changed dramatically) 3. Huge time investment in process (2 million hours per year, for 65,000 employees). That works out to >30 hours per person per year Most spent in conversation about rating employees very little time in conversations with employees. 4.Research shows that performance ratings are more driven by the rater than performance of the ratee. Source: Michael Mount, Steven Scullen, and Maynard Goff Journal of Applied Psychology, 2000. OBSERVATIONS DRIVING CHANGE 24

25. Addressing frequency: The Weekly Check In  Every team leader is to check in with each team member once a week. Not in addition to the work of a team leader; they are the work of a team leader.  Check-ins initiated by the employee/team member, not the leader. Recognizes a simple truth: the team member has more interest in receiving the feedback than the leader has in giving it. THE DELOITTE SOLUTION 25

26. Addressing rating bias: Leaders rate each project based on what they would do, not what they think of the person: 1. Given what I know of this person’s performance, and if it were my money, I would award this person the highest possible compensation increase and bonus [measures overall performance and unique value to the organization on a five- point scale from “strongly agree” to “strongly disagree”]. 2. Given what I know of this person’s performance, I would always want him or her on my team [measures ability to work well with others on the same five-point scale]. 3. This person is at risk for low performance [identifies problems that might harm the customer or the team on a yes-or-no basis]. 4. This person is ready for promotion today [measures potential on a yes-or-no basis]. THE DELOITTE SOLUTION 26

27. THE LESSONS LEARNED 27

28.  Improving performance feedback and appraisals will improve both engagement and performance  Organizations with high employee engagement “get it” and have intuitively shifted or augmented their approach  Performance feedback and appraisal approaches are evolving towards: Greater frequency Greater emphasis on future development, rather than past performance Understanding that rating scales say more about the rater than the employee Lessons Learned 28

29. EventFormatTopicDate TalentMap Monthly Webinar Series Live WebinarWork-life Balance and its Impact on Culture: Confessions of a Reformed Workaholic February 25, 2016 Conference Board of Canada: Public Sector HR 2016 Conference February 23-24, 2016 TalentMap Monthly Webinar Series Live WebinarKeeping Employees Engaged in a Troubled Economy March 24, 2016 OMHRA Spring WorkshopConference/ Trade Show April 13, 2016 Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology Spring Conference April 14-16, 2016 UPCOMING TALENTMAP LEARNING SESSIONS

30. THANK YOU! QUESTIONS AND DISCUSSION 30 Monica Helgoth VP Engagement – TalentMap West mhelgoth@talentmap.com 1-888-641-1113, x515 Norm Baillie-David SVP Engagement nbaillie-david@talentmap.com 1-888-641-1113, x504 http://www.talentmap.com/webinar-past/