Contents
What’s it: One-to-one appraisal is an appraisal method in which superiors directly evaluate their subordinates’ performance. It is a traditional method where appraisal is the job of the manager.
Employees go to the manager to discuss how well they performed during the evaluation period. In addition, the discussion may also address constraints in the work and improvement steps, encouraging feedback for future improvements.
Why is a one-to-one appraisal important?
As with other employee appraisal methods, the one-to-one appraisal is important for evaluating employee performance. Managers assess how successful subordinates are in achieving set targets and how effectively they carry out their current roles.
In general, assessment is important for:
- Discussing salary increases
- Setting targets for the coming period
- Discussing opportunities for promotion
- Assessing the competence and potential of employees
- Identifying training needs
- Developing a motivational program
One-to-one appraisals allow for more personal discussions between managers and employees. Thus, it becomes a moment to develop constructive feedback for future improvement. For example, employees express the obstacles they face at work. And managers provide solutions, suggestions, or take necessary actions. In other cases, subordinates may have the opportunity to suggest improvements to the team, division, or even the company.
In addition, these meetings also allow managers to praise employees for their good performance. Or, they can make constructive suggestions for improvement for underperforming employees.
Another reason why this method is important is preparation. If your company has practiced this method regularly, your employees have time to gather materials. As a result, they are better prepared when facing managers and finally convey everything they deem important. It’s important to get more feedback.
How does a one-to-one appraisal work?
The one-to-one appraisal method requires special sessions. It is a formal meeting between managers and employees.
First, employees fill out a form regarding performance achievements according to their key performance indicators. Once done, they then hand it over to the manager for collection. After all the employees have gathered, the manager holds a meeting with the employees one by one.
Then, the employees turned one by one to the manager. They discuss.
Meetings can be short or long, depending on how often they are held. It may be broken down into regular short meetings and long enough for a final evaluation if it is frequent.
Regular meetings usually discuss employees’ current performance and progress towards achieving targets. For example, a manager might ask employees what percentage they have achieved a target. If they have not achieved as expected, managers can encourage them to improve and work better. In addition, managers may dig deeper into why employees perform poorly and help find solutions.
In addition, during meetings, managers and employees may develop feedback. For example, employees express obstacles at work. Or they provide suggestions or initiatives for future improvements in their division. Long story short, this session is important for making short-term decisions to solve problems at work before they get worse.
Meanwhile, the meeting for the final evaluation usually discusses a more comprehensive aspect. It is usually held at the end of the year and may involve discussion of:
- Performance appraisal for one year concerning each key performance indicator
- Key performance indicators and targets to be achieved next year
- Training and career development needed in the future
What are the advantages of a one-to-one appraisal?
One-to-one appraisals are important for improving communication and coordination between managers and employees. Finally, it could strengthen the synergy between them.
More feedback. This method allows more feedback. It doesn’t just come from the employees but also from the manager. For example, the manager can make suggestions for improvement because performance is still not up to expectations. Say, they advise employees to take appropriate training.
Motivating. Having more personal meetings with managers makes employees happy. They feel valued. In addition, they can get positive feedback from the manager, which is important for solving problems at work. Finally, it makes them more eager to improve themselves, leading to higher motivation.
Continuous improvement. More frequent meetings allow companies to take small steps to address problems before they get worse. As already mentioned, the discussion is not just to evaluate performance. But, it may also discuss other work-related aspects such as job constraints and training.
The meeting becomes an opportunity to identify problems at work. So, for example, managers can provide solutions to employee problems. Or, managers take the necessary action for a problem that requires their intervention.
What are the disadvantages of the one-to-one appraisal?
Time-consuming is the main problem. Managers should spend more time meeting and evaluating each employee individually. So, it can be burdensome and increase stress. It gets worse if the company has many employees, requiring more meetings.
Meanwhile, other weaknesses include:
Negative experience. Negative feedback can lead to a bad experience for employees. In addition, bad office politics can make matters worse. For example, managers put ego first when evaluating performance to bring down an unwelcome employee.
No improvement. For example, employees are afraid to reveal problems in their work because they think it will lower the manager’s evaluation of them. They may also be reluctant to improve the team or division and are more concerned with themselves. Finally, the meeting did not result in constructive feedback for improvement.
Biased. Managers may not be able to 100% evaluate fairly. Evaluations depend on perceptions and are subject to their subjectivity. Bias can be even higher if managers engage in bad office politics. Thus, employees with superior performance may not be rewarded because they don’t like them. In contrast, those who perform poorly may get good marks for being their right accomplice.
