Start a conversation

How do you handle performance pay if annual appraisals are dismantled?

Performance-based pay, often built into annual appraisals, is an ingrained problem because of the assumption that it’s a good idea. The decades of social and behavioural science that insist annual appraisals are a bad idea is equalled by science showing performance and incentivised pay to be counterproductive.

As with annual appraisals, we need to consider a dramatically different approach to that of the status quo. Thankfully, this is finally being recognised in the corporate arena. With books like Daniel Pink’s Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us, challenging the long-held assumption that we are motivated by money, and becoming a New York Times and Wall Street Journal bestseller in the process.

What to do?

Firstly, anything that affects how people are paid is a very sensitive area. We recommend only tackling this issue once people have digested the need for change.

Once ready to consider a change, the primary step is to separate remuneration from the other functions of the annual appraisals whilst your organisation decides on a better way forward. This way, you will end up with a stand-alone functionality for evaluating pay. Once you have this stand-alone function, it is clear to everyone what that is being used for. Currently, the standard multi-purpose appraisal is weakened with pay evaluation being in the mix: for example, you can’t expect open conversation at the same time as a pay evaluation.

“No controlled study has ever found a long-term enhancement in the quality of people’s work as a result of any kind of reward or incentive program. The bottom line is that any approach that offers a reward for better performance is destined to be ineffective.”

Alfie Kohn, Harvard Business Review

Choose files or drag and drop files
Was this article helpful?
  1. John Featherby

  2. Posted
  3. Updated