Evaluation conversation: honing a skill. B. Characteristics The main purpose of conducting an assessment conversation

One of the main difficulties when conducting an appraisal interview is that the appraiser is forced to simultaneously act as both a judge and a consultant in relation to the employees being assessed. At the same time, managers conducting appraisal interviews often try to avoid negative assessments in order to maintain good relations with subordinates. You can improve the appraisal interview process by using the following techniques: - Using informal monitoring of subordinates' work and feedback regarding the degree to which their work meets established requirements before the interview. This allows you to avoid unpleasant surprises during the assessment interview. - Maximum involvement of the assessees themselves in the assessment. When assessing employees, the manager, on the one hand, relies on the employee’s self-assessment (the employee’s assessment of the results of his work), and on the other hand, encourages him to analyze his omissions, discuss their causes and propose solutions to eliminate identified shortcomings in work.

Criticism of a subordinate's actions should be constructive (that is, not limited to pointing out what is bad, but considering opportunities for improvement).
To conduct an effective appraisal interview, managers must have a wide range of knowledge and skills necessary to successfully complete the following tasks. 1. Preparing an interview plan, questions for subordinates and monitoring the progress of the interview. Preliminary preparation of an interview plan, a clear formulation of its goals, monitoring the implementation of assigned tasks (as opposed to unpreparedness, when the interview takes place without a clear plan or when a subordinate is given the opportunity to dominate during its conduct). 2. Establishing and maintaining psychological contact. Establishing and maintaining a favorable environment from the very beginning of the interview psychological climate, conducting the conversation in a friendly manner, showing attention to the problems of the subordinate (as opposed to establishing a climate of mistrust, alienation or excessive familiarity and familiarity, ignoring the problems of the subordinate). Conducting interviews in this manner helps create an atmosphere of cooperation and increases the willingness of subordinates to take initiative and responsibility. 3. Reaction to a tense situation. Calmness and goodwill even when a subordinate provokes a conflict, a willingness to apologize in case of one’s own wrong, without giving up one’s position, the ability to defend one’s point of view in a situation of attacks or other negative reactions from a subordinate (as opposed to an inadequate reaction to emotionally intense situations , irritation or defensiveness in response to claims or accusations from a subordinate and excessive softness and compliance in a clash of opinions). 4. Conflict management. Effective resolution of conflicts of any kind between a subordinate and other employees (the role of a mediator), setting realistic work goals for subordinates that prevent work conflict, the ability to offer assistance and give advice that will be able to prevent the occurrence conflict situation(as opposed to too rude or moralizing discussion when conflicts arise, failure to provide assistance or offering solutions that increase confrontation and deepen the subordinate’s conflict with other employees, setting goals that deliberately provoke conflicts between subordinates). 5. Obtaining the necessary information. The ability to separate the essential from the unimportant, the ability to highlight reliable information, the ability to collect information on all key issues(as opposed to getting too caught up in particular issues and details, asking irrelevant questions, failing to separate facts from opinions, failing to see a problem from a subordinate's point of view). 6. Motivation of employees. Choosing effective means of influencing the motivation of employees, improving their attitude towards the organization and encouraging them to conscientious implementation assigned work; stimulation to work with full effort at the level highest standards productivity and quality (as opposed to the inability to offer the evaluated employee incentives that will increase his satisfaction with work in the organization or force him to work with full dedication in the interests of the organization, lack of support for the efforts of employees aimed at achieving higher performance in their work). 7. Employee development. Assisting the employee in his professional development, showing interest in his professional growth; identifying the development needs of a subordinate and proposing specific measures that can have a positive impact on his level professional achievements(as opposed to refusing assistance to a subordinate in matters of professional development, lack of interest in his professional growth, inability to give suggestions on professional development employee or useless advice that does not take into account his real capabilities).

21. Rules for certification. The procedure for conducting certification is regulated by the current Regulations on Certification of Employees in the organization, which is adopted by the employer. This regulatory document provides the following points that you should pay attention to when conducting certification: category of employees who are subject to certification; the procedure in accordance with which the certification commission is formed; frequency of this event; what is the procedure for making decisions of the current certification commission, as well as the types of these decisions. In accordance with Article 68 Labor Code Russian Federation workers must be familiar with the current Regulations on Certification. The employer independently determines the circle of employees who are subject to certification. At the same time, those professions that do not require certification are not subject to certification. special training and specific knowledge, for example, watchman, cleaner, etc. Moreover, those employees who have worked in this position for less than one year may be exempt from certification. By order of the head of the organization, a certification commission is appointed. All employees who will be certified are notified about the upcoming certification. Based on the results of certification, final documents are drawn up, for example, protocols, conclusions, etc. The final document is created separately for each certified employee, it is endorsed by the members of the certification commission and the employee. The results of the certification may be challenged in court.

22. Stages of certification. Preliminary stage- Preparation of the certification implementation project. Justification and presentation for management of the certification project. Stage of formalization of methods, standards, rules- Development of relevant documents, adoption of organizational decisions by the company management. A competent approach to documenting the certification procedure for the first time allows you to use the created developments in subsequent certifications.
It is recommended to develop a “Regulation on Personnel Certification” - a single internal corporate normative document. It establishes uniform requirements for the frequency, procedure, and methodology for conducting certification of all personnel, as well as for the content, procedure for developing, and approving certification methods. Formalizing the procedure in a document forces you to specify and take into account all the rules, delve into formal details, and write down all possible questions and details of the procedure. This allows you to make the procedure transparent and understandable from the technical side. Trial certification- to test the proposed procedure, a pilot certification project is launched in the personnel management department, all stages of the methodology being implemented at the enterprise are checked and finalized. Preparatory stage- Before each certification procedure planned in advance, employees of the personnel management department carry out preparatory consulting work. Those being certified 2 weeks before the certification are informed of the certification criteria, questions for the exam, have explanatory conversations, and are advised on what and how to do. Carrying out certification- Certification activities carried out in accordance with developed methods and rules. Summing up the certification results- Adoption management decisions, discussion of the results of certification in the team, assessment of the required period for subsequent certifications.

23. Certification problems.Errors during personnel certification. The main mistake can be made at the initial stage. Usually this is the choice of the purpose of certification. If the purpose of certification is to reduce personnel or to get rid of unwanted employees, then in this case many of the advantages that personnel certification can provide are lost. Also, low information support during personnel certification can negatively affect the psychological climate of the team, especially if certification is carried out for the first time. Therefore, it is necessary to explain in detail to senior managers what information they will receive after personnel certification, how to use it and how to solve the required tasks with its help. Company employees should be warned several months in advance about the certification so that they can prepare for this event.

24. Methods of certification. There are many different certification methods, but in practice they mainly represent different variations of the following methods: - Ranking, which requires placing subordinates in order depending on their merits (achievements), and, as a rule, according to their real ability to perform the job , although sometimes the ranking is based on several selected characteristics. - Classification in which employees are divided into several predetermined categories of achievements (merits) based on the overall performance of the employees. As a rule, there are five of these categories. - The rating scale is the most commonly used certification method. It is based on a list personal characteristics or factors, against each of which a scale is placed, usually consisting of five points, and the manager (supervisor) notes on the scale to what extent a particular factor or characteristic is inherent in the employee. - The open assessment method is a relatively recent innovation, which was introduced due to the unsatisfactory design of the rating scale. Instead of forcing a manager to evaluate a number of personal characteristics that are not always suitable for certification, new method focuses on the nature of the work performed, requiring only a few phrases from the manager about the employee being rated instead of checking boxes in columns.

Whatever personnel assessment methods are used, their final stage is an interview or interview with the employee being certified, during which the manager and subordinate develop plans to eliminate weaknesses and strengthen strengths. These types of interviews put employees in an awkward position because few people like to receive or give negative evaluations. However, with appropriate preparation of the manager conducting the interview, these inconveniences can be overcome.

There are three main types of assessment interviews (Table 4). If an employee performs his duties unsatisfactorily and is not subject to improvement, the manager may not conduct an evaluation interview and either accept low quality work of this employee, or fire him.

Table 4. Types and purposes of assessment interviews

Let's consider what goals are pursued Various types interview.

Satisfactory - with promotion - the simplest of all interview types. Its goal is to discuss plans for further building the employee’s career and develop a personal plan for his educational and professional development necessary for the transition to a new position.

Satisfactory - no promotion - interviews for those employees whose performance of duties is assessed quite highly, but there is no prospect of promotion. Perhaps the subordinate has already reached his level of competence, or there are no vacant jobs in the company, or he is satisfied with his position and does not want a promotion. Here, the purpose of the appraisal interview is not to improve the skills or development of the employee, but to maintain satisfactory performance of duties. The manager must find additional incentives that are important for the employee and sufficient to maintain satisfactory performance of duties - for example, use such forms of motivation as bonuses, empowerment, variety of tasks, verbal encouragement.

If an employee's performance is unsatisfactory but correctable, the purpose of the interview is to develop a plan to improve performance.

To successfully conduct an assessment interview, you should prepare for it, study job description employee, compare his level of performance with standards and check the employee's previous evaluation results. Then you need to prepare the employee himself: discuss his problems with him, set a date and time for the interview, and finally, prepare questions and comments. Interviews with specialists and ordinary employees should last no more than an hour. Interviews with managers usually last two to three hours. During the interview, no one should be distracted by phone calls or visits.

1. Be precise and specific. Use goal setting terms. Use examples such as: absenteeism, tardiness, arguments or losses, orders completed, tasks or projects completed on time, cost management and cost reduction, number of errors, cost versus budget, customer feedback, turnover, lead times, inventory levels, incident reports, etc.

2. Do not offend employees, make correct and loyal comments. Don't say, "You're too slow in preparing these reports." Instead, try to measure the employee's performance against established standards (“These reports are typically completed within 10 days”). Do not compare the level of performance of one employee with another (“He works faster than you”).

Encourage the employee to talk. Listen to what the employee is saying, ask open-ended questions like: “What do you think we can do to improve the situation?” Use phrases like: “Tell me more.” Repeat the employee's last phrase as a question, for example: "Do you think you won't be able to finish the job?"

Don't beat around the bush. Don't make empty talk. Make sure the employee understands what he is doing right and what he is doing wrong. Give convincing examples; try to get employees to agree to improve their performance. Develop an action plan. These useful recommendations, however, cannot completely eliminate fears, suspicion of subjectivity, and mistrust of subordinates in the evaluation interview process and its results. All this leads to the fact that subordinates, while waiting for and during the evaluation interview, consciously or, more often, unconsciously, impulsively take a defensive position. And this is not surprising: protection is an important and familiar aspect of life to all of us. For example, when a manager tells an employee about his poor performance, the employee's first reaction will most often be denial. By denying guilt, the employee avoids questions about his competence. Others react to criticism with anger and aggression. This helps to let off steam and relieve stress. Still others “hide in their own shell” and withdraw into themselves.

In any case, understanding the psychology of defense is very important in assessment. Russian scientist M.V. Feinberg makes the following recommendations for managers conducting appraisal interviews.

Understand that defensive behavior is completely normal.

Never attack a person who is defending himself. Do not try to explain to a person the reason for his behavior by saying: “You know, the real reason for your reaction is that you cannot stand criticism and blame.” Instead, try to focus on the action ("sales are down") rather than the person ("you're not selling enough products").

Postpone action. Sometimes it's better to do nothing. People often react to sudden threats by instinctively hiding behind their “masks.” But if they are given enough time, real human contact is possible.

Explore your own limitations. Don't expect to be able to solve every problem that arises, especially if it involves human factors. It is even more important to remember that a leader must be a psychologist.

Criticism should not humiliate a person and hurt his dignity. Critical comments can only be made in private with a subordinate in a constructive manner. Give examples of incidents and specific suggestions of what could be done and why. Avoid “critical reproaches” made only once a year; it is necessary to carry out daily feedback with a subordinate so that the official audit does not come as a surprise. Never tell a subordinate that he always “does everything wrong” (because no one can do everything right all the time). Finally, criticism must be objective and free from any prejudice."

http://cubcadet-parts.ru/ service centers cub cadet

The success of an assessment interview critically depends on both the level of training of managers and their ability to solve the problems that arise during the interview.

Assessment interview involves the subordinate's assessment of the results of his work and his achievements during the reporting period. The manager’s questions during the interview are designed to establish not only the true level of the employee’s performance, but also to identify factors that negatively affect his work. After reviewing the results of work for the reporting period, you can move on to setting new goals and defining plans for the future. An assessment interview requires from a manager not just the ability to listen, but the ability to listen actively.

During the report of the evaluated employee, the manager can use the following techniques active listening;

Listen and ask questions to clarify your understanding of what you hear;

Show how what is heard is understood to avoid misunderstandings or misinterpretations;

Use questions and pauses to give the subordinate an opportunity to speak;

From time to time, summarize what has been said;

Point out issues to the subordinate that require further explanation or clarification;

Encourage employees to talk about their most significant achievements;

For a more accurate understanding of the employee’s attitude to the issues discussed, carefully monitor those manifestations nonverbal behavior(posture, facial expressions, gestures, tone of voice, etc.), which accompany the subordinate’s answers to the manager’s questions.

You should strive to end the interview on a positive note so that the subordinate leaves the manager with a good attitude towards work. Finally, specific goals to be achieved in the future should be clearly formulated. In addition, it is necessary to determine the date when the results of the work done will be summed up next.

One of the main difficulties when conducting an appraisal interview is that the Appraiser is forced to simultaneously act as both a judge and a consultant in relation to the employees being assessed. At the same time, managers conducting appraisal interviews often seek to avoid negative assessments in order to maintain good relations with subordinates. You can improve the assessment interview process by using the following techniques:

Regular informal monitoring and feedback prior to the interview to avoid unpleasant surprises during the assessment interview itself.

Maximum involvement of the assessees themselves in the assessment. When evaluating employees, the manager, on the one hand, relies on the employee’s self-esteem (the employee’s assessment of the results of his work), and on the other, encourages the employee to analyze his omissions, discuss their causes and propose solutions.

Criticism of a subordinate's actions should be constructive (that is, not limited to pointing out what is bad, but considering opportunities for improvement).

To conduct an effective appraisal interview, managers must have a wide range of knowledge and skills necessary to successfully complete the following tasks:

1. Preparing an interview plan, questions for subordinates and monitoring progress interviews. Preliminary preparation of an interview plan, a clear formulation of its goals, monitoring the implementation of assigned tasks (as opposed to unpreparedness, when the interview takes place without a clear plan or when a subordinate is given the opportunity to dominate during its conduct).

2. Establishing and maintaining psychological contact. Establishing and maintaining a favorable psychological climate from the very beginning of the interview, conducting the conversation in a friendly manner, showing attention to the problems of the subordinate (as opposed to establishing a climate of mistrust, alienation or excessive familiarity and familiarity, ignoring the problems of the subordinate). Conducting interviews in this manner helps create an atmosphere of cooperation and increases the willingness of subordinates to take initiative and responsibility.

3. Reaction to a tense situation. Calmness and goodwill even when a subordinate provokes a conflict, a willingness to apologize in case of one’s own wrong, without giving up one’s position, the ability to defend one’s point of view in a situation of attacks or other negative reactions from a subordinate (as opposed to an inadequate reaction to emotionally intense situations , irritation or defensive position in response to claims or accusations from a subordinate and excessive softness and compliance in a clash of opinions).

4. Conflict management. Effectively resolving conflicts of any kind between a subordinate and other employees (the role of a mediator), setting realistic work goals for subordinates that prevent work conflict, assistance and advice that can prevent a conflict situation from arising (as opposed to being too harsh or preachy in discussions that inspire conflicts, failure to provide assistance or proposing solutions that increase confrontation and deepen the conflict of the subordinate with other employees, setting goals that deliberately provoke conflicts between subordinates).

5. Obtaining the necessary information. The ability to separate the essential from the unimportant, the ability to isolate reliable information, the ability to collect information on all key issues (as opposed to being too stuck on individual problems and details, asking questions that are not relevant, the inability to separate facts from opinions, the inability to consider a problem from the point of view of a subordinate ).

6. Employee motivation. Choosing effective means of influencing the motivation of employees, improving their attitude towards the organization and encouraging them to conscientiously perform the assigned work; incentives to work at their full potential to maintain staff performance at the highest standards of productivity and quality (as opposed to failing to offer evaluated employees incentives that will increase their job satisfaction in the organization or force them to work at their full potential in the interests of the organization; lack of support for employee efforts aimed at achieving higher performance in their work).

7. Employee development. Assisting the employee in his professional development, showing interest in his professional growth; identifying the development needs of the subordinate and proposing specific measures that can have a positive impact on the level of his professional achievements (as opposed to refusing the subordinate assistance in matters of professional development, lack of interest in his professional growth, inability to make suggestions for the employee’s professional development, or useless advice that does not take into account its real capabilities).

Conducting assessment interviews (conversations) with working employees is currently just beginning to enter the HR life of many of our domestic enterprises. In this regard, each company, through trial and error, tries to develop its own unique approach to this area of ​​personnel assessment.

Without claiming the absolute truth, however, having some practical experience in setting up a system of evaluative conversations, I would like to share it with readers.

So, the company PromPlastTorg LLC represents an average industrial enterprise with well-built procedures for personnel assessment and development. The company conducts personnel certification every three years, operates a system of continuous on-the-job training (mentoring), conducts ongoing training in third-party organizations, carries out psychological testing that reveals the pace of development of necessary personal qualities, and periodically reviews personnel reserve by enterprise, etc.

And everything seems fine, if not for one “but”. Did not have unified system, which would connect all the above procedures into a single complex. It turned out like this: a person was taught, but in the wrong way; they were promoted to a position, but the person could not cope, was not prepared professionally, or his personal qualities let him down. There was still no feedback at all, i.e. the opinions and wishes of employees were not taken into account. This led to the fact that someone was satisfied with their place of work and did not strive for more, and based on the totality of their assessed professional and personal qualities, they were “moved” forward. Or another example: one workshop manager wanted to work in another production workshop, to master another production, but instead he was promoted to a higher position. The result, unfortunately, was disastrous: in the examples given, qualified personnel quit. The first one found a quieter job, and the second one found a job he liked, but with competitors.

That is, a seemingly well-functioning personnel management system gave periodic failures. The staff was dissatisfied, and certain fears of all sorts of existing systems personal and professional testing, based on the results of which they tried to raise someone almost “to the skies” without asking his desire, and someone with high potential, but not yet up to par, on the contrary, was “lowered to the ground.”

As a way out of the current negative situation, it was proposed to introduce a system of quarterly evaluation conversations, which would allow us to establish feedback with employees, listen to their desires and moods, outline a plan for their development that is primarily of interest to the employee himself, comprehensively assess the pace of his development, etc.

The assessment conversations were aimed at resolving the following issues:

• evaluate the implementation of tasks that were planned for the past quarter;
• determine the reasons (depending and independent of the employee) of non-fulfillment or poor performance of these tasks;
• evaluate the work performed and develop a joint plan to improve performance;
• set tasks to be completed for the next reporting period;
• determine the direction of further development of the employee: hear the employee’s wishes in terms of own development, link with the needs of the enterprise, develop a training plan (external or internal).

Everything seemed simple. We started by having managers conduct these conversations on their own. And as one would expect, formally, as usual, according to the well-known scheme:

• Called;
• From the very beginning he reprimanded (gave an assessment of the completion of tasks);
• “You don’t know how to work, you slacker!” (identified reasons for failure to complete tasks);
• "Go to work!" (set tasks to be completed for the next reporting period);
• “Yes, I’ll fire you (option: I’ll deprive you of your bonus)!” (determined directions for further development of the employee)
• With a sense of accomplishment and self-esteem, I said to myself in high spirits: “I’m doing great.”

The result is even more deplorable. People have simply become afraid of additional quarterly executions. There was no talk of any frankness on the part of the employee, a joint plan of action, development, or any talk. Another option: the calmly indifferent position of the interviewer according to the principle “Well, they ordered a conversation, I conducted it...” also did not bring anything useful.

Then it was decided to conduct assessment interviews on a commission basis with the involvement of a large number of management specialists. Imagine: an ordinary economist comes in, who had previously only seen the vice president of the company on TV, sits down with shaking knees and in a trembling voice begins to talk about the reasons for the failure to meet the budget. Firstly, a frank, open conversation aimed at finding out ways of employee development will not work here, and secondly, real reasons(not formal, given in reports) failure to fulfill the budget can be of great interest to the vice president, and the assessment conversation automatically turns into a tough certification according to the first scenario (see above) of the head of the economic service. Which also takes us away from the topic of conducting an effective assessment interview. In this case, as you already understand, the result is also negative. Thus, through trial and error, the company came to understand what not to do. But how should it be done?

Firstly, we conducted training (both group and personal) for all of our managers, the purpose of which was to convey to each boss the goals of conducting assessment conversations, to draw a clear line in their minds between a “call on the carpet” and an assessment interview, we indicated that that communication with an employee should generally take place on a friendly, open basis. Preferably not on a Friday evening, when everyone is tired (both the manager and the employee).

Secondly, they stopped creating evaluation commissions in an expanded form. It was agreed that there should be three interview participants: the employee, his immediate supervisor and an HR specialist, whose functions included preventing the dialogue-interview from turning into a boss’s monologue (in any negative or positive form). After all, it is very important to hear the employee’s opinion, even if it is not positive.

Thirdly, the conversation was carried out according to clearly established rules, otherwise it turned out: we sat, chatted and went our separate ways - there was no point. After each conversation, an Evaluation Interview Sheet was filled out and signed by all participants. It reflected the results of assessing the employee’s performance for past period, the reasons for failures or successes in completing tasks were noted, a work plan for the subsequent period was formed, stages of subsequent employee development based on, most importantly, comprehensive assessment his personal and professional qualities. For example, as a result of such a conversation, one ordinary executive was “transferred” from auxiliary work to managing a key project. At the same time, the interview participants, who assessed primarily the pace of development of the employee as a leader and professional, considered him worthy. The employee's opinion was extremely positive - he was eager for this place. This decision was approved by a senior manager, and the issue was resolved.

Fourthly, but not least, the HR psychologist constantly worked with the team to increase the employee’s openness during the assessment conversation. So that an employee comes to an interview with a ready-made, clearly formulated plan for his own development and openly sets it out, speaking directly about the difficulties that interfere with his work and about achievements and successes that are not his merit, but a consequence of a positive combination of circumstances.

In particular, when preparing for the conversation, the attention of the employee being assessed was drawn to:

• analysis by the employee of the fulfillment of previously set goals with a clear formation of an opinion as to why they were or were not achieved;
• the need to form an opinion, which prevents you from working more effectively;
• the need to take a critical look at one's strengths and weak sides, professional and personal competence;
• the need to clearly formulate what further steps in development you want to take and what you need to get from the employer for this, how your preferences fit in with the needs of the company, its stage of development;
• the need to clearly formulate 3-6 personal goals on which you want to concentrate in the next period, determine the criteria for assessing their achievement. It should sound something like this: “In the next quarter, I want to lead a project on “....”, for this I need to independently study existing production technologies, undergo training at a third-party company LLC “...” in the “Project Manager” course, and go to exchange experience at JSC "...".

No less attention was paid to preparing managers for interviews. In particular, emphasis was placed on:

• clarity of goals, objectives and expected results. Before the interview began, the manager had to review everything Required documents, which are relevant to the assessment interview that took place at the previous interview. Clearly define and formulate what he wants to change in the subordinate’s work, in his behavior, set a time frame and what the subordinate will need help with.
• clear establishment of the day, time and place of the assessment conversation. This is necessary so that both the manager and the subordinate being evaluated have time to prepare. The practice of our company shows that the most optimal time is 3-5 days. If it is more, then the employee “burns out”; if it is less, he arrives unprepared. Try not to reschedule the appointed time and date. A conversation conducted suddenly, at an unplanned time (even if the employee was warned in advance) will be useless. It looks something like this: a surprised, heated, disconnected employee “from the bench” comes running, his thoughts are scattered, his gaze is foggy, he doesn’t want anything specific, he’s not in the mood for discussion. Nobody needs this approach.
• Allocating sufficient, necessary time for the interview. There is nothing worse when an employee, in a fit of sudden frankness, is interrupted by a planned meeting. However, there is no need to unduly prolong the conversation, following the lead of overly sociable (usually irrelevant) colleagues. Also, whenever possible, all employees being assessed should be in comparable conditions with regard to the time allocated to them. Again, the practice of our company shows that the allocated hour is quite sufficient.
• determining the location of the assessment conversation. Wherein Special attention should be given good conditions(comfortable chair, ventilation or, conversely, heating, etc.). There is nothing funnier and sadder, from an HR point of view, than trying to bring an employee sitting in the middle of the room on an iron chair, with the sunlight blinding his eyes, into a frank, constructive dialogue. It is highly desirable that no one can distract those gathered: turn off Cell Phones, forward incoming calls from the work phone to the secretary, tell him that there is a meeting and not to disturb him. Otherwise, everything will be formal, without proper results. For example, in our case, an informal atmosphere was offered: comfortable soft chairs, the absence of a standard “manager-subordinate” table, tea, coffee, cookies.
• preliminary collection of all documents necessary for the employee assessment. It is necessary to prepare: a job description, an individual work plan for a subordinate, a personal file, materials from previous assessment conversations, etc.
• Mandatory completion of the evaluation form immediately after the end of the interview.

At the beginning of the assessment interview, the floor was given to the manager, who should briefly formulate the main tasks and criteria for the upcoming assessment. Then the employee was asked to evaluate his work himself and talk about the difficulties he encountered during the past reporting period. At this stage, it is important to listen to the employee without comment, trying to understand his logic. However, if the information provided by the assessee is not clear, participants ask clarifying questions. Otherwise, you may find yourself in an unfavorable light when they “hang noodles on your ears.” At the same time, the purpose of the questions is to obtain information, and not to express a personal or professional attitude towards the employee. This circumstance must be constantly combated so that questions are asked in a calm, neutral manner and are aimed at supporting the employee, as well as at better understanding his emotional and professional state.

As a result, based on the information obtained during the interview process, the presented results of professional and personality testing, the training provided and the employee’s opinion on his further development An evaluation interview sheet was formed. In this document, they were fixed bilaterally comprehensive solution about the employee’s development path that suits both parties. Of course, things didn't always go smoothly. There were situations when a highly potential employee, eager for a higher position, received a temporary refusal due to the lack of a vacancy, or an obviously unready candidate applied for a higher position. It happened that I had to part with such people.

However, speaking in general, there were much more positive aspects. The employees saw the prospects for their development, saw that the organization was not indifferent to them, that the company was ready to invest in them for training, develop them in various jobs, they tried to meet the rather strict requirements of the company. At the same time, upon learning that their development option did not meet the organization’s requirements, few quit; on the contrary, in each such case several alternative options were offered. For example, a leading budgeting specialist, applying for the position of head of the budgeting department, was offered to become a leading specialist in the business planning department with the prospect (in case of successful further work) of becoming a deputy head economic management(one step higher than the position for which he was currently applying).

Mansurov R.E., candidate economic sciences, Director of the Zelenodolsk branch of the Private Educational Institution of Higher Professional Education "Institute of Economics, Management and Law (Kazan)© Mansurov R.E. , 2010
© Published with the kind permission of the author

The article describes real example building a system of appraisal interviews in the company: through trial and error, gradually abandoning ineffective options, the company managed to develop an interesting and useful system for conducting appraisal interviews with employees, which benefits both the organization itself and the employees.

Conducting assessment interviews (conversations) with working employees is currently just beginning to become part of HR - the life of many of our domestic enterprises. In this regard, each company, through trial and error, tries to develop its own unique approach to this area of ​​personnel assessment.

So, the company PromPlastTorg LLC is a medium-sized industrial enterprise with well-built procedures for personnel assessment and development. The company conducts personnel certification every three years, operates a system of continuous on-the-job training (mentoring), conducts ongoing training in third-party organizations, carries out psychological testing that reveals the pace of development of necessary personal qualities, periodically reviews the personnel reserve for the enterprise, etc.

And everything seems fine, if not for one “but”. There was no single system that would connect all the above procedures into a single complex. It turned out like this: a person was taught, but in the wrong way; they were promoted to a position, but the person could not cope, was not prepared professionally, or his personal qualities let him down. There was still no feedback at all, i.e. the opinions and wishes of employees were not taken into account. This led to the fact that someone was satisfied with their place of work and did not strive for more, and based on the totality of their assessed professional and personal qualities, they were “moved” forward. Or another example: one workshop manager wanted to work in another production workshop, master another production, but instead he was promoted to a higher position. The result, unfortunately, was disastrous: in the examples given, qualified personnel quit. The first one found a quieter job, and the second one found a job he liked, but with competitors.

That is, a seemingly well-functioning personnel management system gave periodic failures. The staff was dissatisfied, certain fears began to appear in front of all sorts of existing systems of personal and professional testing, as a result of which, without asking his desire, they tried to raise someone almost “to heaven”, and someone with high potential, but not yet reaching, on the contrary , “they dropped below the plinth.”

As a way out of the current negative situation, it was proposed to introduce a system of quarterly evaluation conversations, which would allow establishing feedback with employees, listening to their desires and moods, outlining a plan for their development, interesting, first of all, for the employee himself, comprehensively assessing the pace of his development and etc.

The assessment conversations were aimed at resolving the following issues:

Evaluate the completion of tasks that were planned for the past quarter;

Determine the reasons (depending and independent of the employee) for non-fulfillment or poor quality of these tasks;

Assess the work performed and develop a joint plan to improve performance;

Set tasks to be completed for the next reporting period;

Determine the direction of the employee’s further development: hear the employee’s wishes regarding his own development, link them with the needs of the enterprise, develop a training plan (external or internal).

Everything seemed simple. We started by having managers conduct these conversations on their own. And as one would expect, formally, as usual, according to the well-known scheme:

1. From the very beginning he reprimanded (gave an assessment of the completion of tasks);

   “You don’t know how to work, you slacker!” (identified reasons for failure to complete tasks);

   "Go to work!" (set tasks to be completed for the next reporting period);

   “Yes, I’ll fire you (option: I’ll deprive you of your bonus)!” (determined directions for further development of the employee)

   With a sense of accomplishment and self-esteem, I said to myself in high spirits: “I’m doing great.”

The result is even more deplorable. People simply began to fear additional quarterly executions. There was no talk of any frankness on the part of the employee, a joint plan of action, development, or any talk. Another option: the calmly indifferent position of the interviewer according to the principle “Well, they ordered a conversation, I conducted it...” also did not bring anything useful.

Then it was decided to conduct assessment interviews on a commission basis, with the involvement of a large number of management specialists. Imagine: an ordinary economist comes in, who had previously only seen the vice president of the company on TV, sits down with shaking knees and in a trembling voice begins to talk about the reasons for the failure to meet the budget. Firstly, a frank, open conversation aimed at finding out ways of employee development will not work here, and secondly, the real reasons (not formal, given in reports) for non-fulfillment of the budget may be of great interest to the vice president, and the evaluation conversation automatically turns into a tough one. certification according to the first scenario (see above) of the head of the economic service. Which also takes us away from the topic of conducting an effective assessment interview. In this case, as you already understand, the result is also negative. Thus, through trial and error, the company came to understand what not to do. But how should it be done?

Firstly, we conducted training (both group and personal) for all our managers, the purpose of which was to convey to each boss the goals of conducting assessment conversations, to draw a clear line in their minds between a “call on the carpet” and an assessment interview, and pointed out that communication with an employee should generally take place on a friendly, open basis. Preferably not on a Friday evening, when everyone is tired (both the manager and the employee).

Secondly, they stopped creating evaluation commissions in an expanded form. It was agreed that there should be three interview participants: the employee, his immediate supervisor and an HR specialist, one of whose functions was, among other things, to prevent the dialogue-interview from turning into a boss’s monologue (in any negative or positive form). After all, it is very important to hear the employee’s opinion, even if it is not positive.

Thirdly, the conversation was carried out according to clearly established rules, otherwise it turned out: we sat, chatted and went our separate ways - there was no point. After each conversation, an Evaluation Interview Sheet was filled out and signed by all participants. It reflected the results of assessing the employee’s performance for the past period, noted the reasons for failures or successes in completing tasks, formed a work plan for the next period, and the stages of subsequent development of the employee based, most importantly, on a comprehensive assessment of his personal and professional qualities. For example, as a result of such a conversation, one ordinary executive was “transferred” from auxiliary work to managing a key project. At the same time, the interview participants, who assessed, first of all, the pace of development of the employee as a leader and professional, considered him worthy. The employee's opinion was extremely positive - he was eager for this place. This decision was approved by a senior manager, and the issue was resolved.

Fourthly, but not least, the HR psychologist constantly worked with the team to increase the employee’s openness during the assessment conversation. So that an employee comes to an interview with a ready-made, clearly formulated plan for his own development and openly sets it out, speaking directly about the difficulties that interfere with his work and about achievements and successes that are not his merit, but a consequence of a positive combination of circumstances.

In particular, when preparing for the conversation, the attention of the employee being assessed was drawn to:

Analysis by the employee of the fulfillment of previously set goals with a clear formation of an opinion as to why they were or were not achieved;

The need to form an opinion, which prevents you from working more effectively;

The need for a critical look at one’s strengths and weaknesses, professional and personal competence;

The need to clearly formulate what further steps in development you want to take and what you need to get from the employer for this, how your preferences fit in with the needs of the company, its stage of development;

The need to clearly formulate 3-6 personal goals on which you want to concentrate in the next period, determine the criteria for assessing their achievement. It should sound something like this: “In the next quarter, I want to lead a project on “....”, for this I need to independently study existing production technologies, undergo training at a third-party company LLC “...” in the “Project Manager” course, go to exchange experiences at JSC "...".

No less attention was paid to preparing managers for interviews. In particular, emphasis was placed on:

Clarity of goals, objectives and expected results. Before the interview began, the supervisor was required to review all necessary documents that were relevant to the assessment interview that took place in the previous interview. Clearly define and formulate what he wants to change in the subordinate’s work, in his behavior, set a time frame and what the subordinate will need help with.

Clearly establishing the day, time and place of the assessment conversation. This is necessary so that both the manager and the subordinate being evaluated have time to prepare. The practice of our company shows that the most optimal time is 3-5 days. If it is more, then the employee “burns out”; if it is less, he arrives unprepared. Try not to reschedule the appointed time and date. A conversation conducted suddenly, at an unplanned time (even if the employee was warned in advance) will be useless. It looks something like this: a surprised, heated, disconnected employee “from the bench” comes running, his thoughts are scattered, his gaze is foggy, he doesn’t want anything specific, he’s not in the mood for discussion. Nobody needs this approach.

Allow sufficient time for the interview. There is nothing worse when an employee, in a fit of sudden frankness, is interrupted by a scheduled meeting that is about to begin. However, there is no need to unduly prolong the conversation, following the lead of overly sociable (usually irrelevant) colleagues. Also, whenever possible, all employees being assessed should be in comparable conditions with regard to the time allocated to them. Again, the practice of our company shows that the allocated hour is quite sufficient.

Determining the location of the assessment conversation. In this case, special attention should be paid to good conditions (comfortable chair, ventilation or, conversely, heating, etc.). There is nothing funnier and sadder, from the HR point of view, than trying to bring an employee sitting in the middle of the room on an iron chair, with the sunlight blinding his eyes, into a frank, constructive dialogue. It is extremely desirable that no one can distract those gathered: turn off cell phones, forward incoming calls from the work phone to the secretary, say that the meeting is not to be disturbed. Otherwise, everything will be formal, without proper results. For example, in our case, an informal atmosphere was offered: comfortable soft chairs, the absence of a standard “manager-subordinate” table, tea, coffee, cookies.

Preliminary collection of all documents necessary for the employee assessment. It is necessary to prepare: a job description, an individual work plan for a subordinate, a personal file, materials from previous assessment conversations, etc.

Compulsory completion of the evaluation form immediately after the interview.

At the beginning of the assessment interview, the floor was given to the manager, who should briefly formulate the main tasks and criteria for the upcoming assessment. Then the employee was asked to evaluate his work himself and talk about the difficulties he encountered during the past reporting period. At this stage, it is important to listen to the employee without comment, trying to understand his logic. However, if the information provided by the assessee is not clear, participants ask clarifying questions. Otherwise, you may find yourself in an unfavorable light when they “hang noodles on your ears.” At the same time, the purpose of the questions is to obtain information, and not to express a personal or professional attitude towards the employee. This circumstance must be constantly combated so that questions are asked in a calm, neutral manner and are aimed at supporting the employee, as well as at better understanding his emotional and professional state.

As a result, based on the information obtained during the interview process, the presented results of professional and personal testing, the training provided and the employee’s opinion on his further development, an “Evaluation Interview Sheet” was formed. This document confirmed bilaterally a comprehensive decision on the employee’s development path that satisfied both parties. Of course, things didn't always go smoothly. There were situations when a highly potential employee, eager for a higher position, received a temporary refusal due to the lack of a vacancy, or an obviously unready candidate applied for a higher position. It happened that I had to part with such people.

However, speaking in general, there were much more positive aspects. The employees saw the prospects for their development, saw that the organization was not indifferent to them, that the company was ready to invest in them for training, develop them in various jobs, they tried to meet the rather strict requirements of the company. At the same time, having learned that their development option did not meet the requirements of the organization, few quit; on the contrary, in each such case several alternative options were offered. For example, a leading specialist in budgeting, applying for the position of head of the budgeting department, was offered to become a leading specialist in the business planning department with the prospect (in case of successful further work) of becoming a deputy head of the economic department (a step higher than the position for which he was currently applying time).