Could Co-Workers Give Better Reviews Than Bosses?
The majority of employees feel they aren't being judged fairly around the office, new research shows.
In a study by social-recognition solutions provider Globoforce, more than half of surveyed workers said the performance reviews they get from their employers are inaccurate, while 63 percent said their reviews aren't a true indicator of their performance.
Moving forward, employees said they would prefer a review system that incorporates input from more sources than just their bosses. The research found that 80 percent of employees think the most accurate evaluation of performance includes feedback from the worker's direct supervisor alongside crowdsourced input from everyone in the organization, including the employee's peers.
The study shows that workers who already get peer feedback as part of their performance reviews feel more appreciated and more satisfied with their jobs than respondents who are reviewed only by a single manager.
In addition to seeking feedback from more people, 73 percent of employees prefer unsolicited input rather than forced feedback. Meanwhile, 71 percent seek feedback in real time, compared to just 17 percent who would rather their work only be reviewed quarterly.
"The traditional annual performance review is rooted in what could fairly be termed as a single point of failure," said Eric Mosley, CEO of Globoforce. "Through inspired and objective feedback across an organization, employees can receive the accurate performance evaluations they have long sought."
The study discovered employers would be best served by coming up with a review system that employees appreciate. Among employees who are satisfied with their performance reviews, 83 percent are also satisfied with their jobs. Conversely, just 55 percent of those who are dissatisfied with their reviews are happy in their current positions.
The study was based on surveys of more than 700 full-time workers at companies that each had more than 500 employees.