Performance appraisals - an opportunity for recognition and self-improvement

Since first introduced, with limited impact, as a way of evaluating civil servants’ overall job performance, performance appraisals have undergone a number of changes over the years to make them an integral part of human resources management.

There has been a shift away from the point system, where you moved up according to established rules based on seniority in your rank or position, to individual meetings, which are now the norm, resulting in assessments that are more aligned with results. Performance is now the name of the game.

Performance appraisals are now commonplace in most countries’ public sectors, even if they’re not always used for the entire workforce. The methods used can vary, and appraisals can have a significant impact on a civil servant’s career, mobility and compensation.

Like in France, it’s an annual exercise in most countries. There are some outliers: Hungary, Ireland and Malta conduct one every six months, whereas Poland and Portugal hold them every two years. Things are more flexible in Germany, where they’re required at least once every three years or when an employee moves into a new role.

The criteria used in appraisals may be established by the central administration, at the regional level (where there are state governments, for example), by the administrative unit (Spain, Finland) or based on the collective agreement (Denmark). In Switzerland, managers conduct preliminary harmonisation talks, the records of which are collected by HR and discussed as part of regular management meetings. The information is used to help establish more precise, department-specific standards.

There has also been a shift in who’s involved in the process, which is no longer limited to the employee being evaluated and their immediate supervisor. In many countries, there is at least a third person involved, and not necessarily a second-level manager. In Sweden, for example, it’s an HR advisor, and in Lithuania a union representative. In Cyprus and Latvia, appraisals are conducted by committees of at least three people, either peers of the manager or other people whose work is related to the employee’s role.

In some places, the consequences of a negative appraisal can be serious. In Belgium, you can be dismissed for lack of professional expertise if you receive two “unsatisfactory” appraisals in three years. But the rewards of a positive appraisal can be just as significant: in Bulgaria, an exceptional performance review can earn you a 15% raise (but no more than twice in your career).

Although there’s no denying that performance appraisal training would lead to better outcomes, it’s not always mandatory for managers. Slovenia is one of the few countries where preparatory courses for appraisal meetings are part of compulsory management training.

Beyond the basics of who, how and when, two countries have recently introduced innovations to help standardise the performance appraisal process:

• In Italy, individuals and departments are evaluated on the same annual performance management cycle. Performance reports and individual appraisal meetings must be fully aligned, in terms of both objectives and results. Anonymised data is published on the government’s NoiPA portal.

• In the Netherlands, a new administration-wide framework was introduced for positions and appraisals in order to improve transparency, clarity and mobility between departments.