Local governments are changing the frequency of performance evaluations, who receives them and what they’re assessing after years of poor opinions about performance reviews, Governing reports.
In National Research Center surveys, local government employees pan the way their employers deal with employee performance. Only about a third think they do a good job of handling low-performing and high-performing workers. And although 72% believe supervisors treat employees with respect, only 55% approve of the way their employers evaluate performance.
One of the biggest problems with employee evaluations, says Scott Lazenby, who has spent four decades managing cities, is that they tend to take place only once a year. This leaves the potential that a staffer contentedly goes to work every day, only to find at the end of 12 months that his efforts have been systematically unsatisfactory. Equally problematic is the deferred validation for a superior worker. Â
Last year, Charlottesville, Virginia, started emphasizing ongoing communication between supervisors and employees about performance, and formal reviews are now done at least twice a year.
The infrequency of performance reviews isn’t local government’s only problem. They’re also often inconsistent in how reviews are done, which Minneapolis, for example, is addressing by establishing strategic goals and informing workers about exactly how they will be assessed. Read the full story.
