Improving on the 'yearly disappointment' at work

At work, I’ve dubbed my yearly performance review the ‘yearly disappointment.’ It’s the time when my supervisor and I look back at the past year and review how much of my goals have been met. The supervisor then gives me a score between 1 and 10. Based on the score I get a higher or lower raise.

Now, this year I got the highest possible score: 8. It’s not actually possible to score a 10 because there’s always something that you could improve, even though they can’t think of anything when I ask. Luckily, it’s also not possible to score lower than 6, probably because nobody can suck so bad without getting fired. So, instead of the proposed 1-10, the scale is actually between 6 and 8.

Now, the meeting is usually more about the scores than it is about actually improving anything. It’s a performance review, but really we’re negotiating about a raise here more than anything else. Because of this, the entire thing always ends with both parties being unsatisfied. I always want a bigger raise, and the supervisor always just wants to get it over with and move on to the next mandatory performance review because they don’t actually have any say in raises. I’m sure they’d love to talk about actual performance improvements, but the scoring system makes that practically impossible.

This meeting should be an opportunity to actually think on how the employer-employee relationship could be improved. Instead, the relationship is often degraded. It could be a great time to discuss new opportunities and old grievances. It’s usually at the end of the year or otherwise very early in the new year, so it could be an opportunity to start fresh with a clean slate.

Most managers and supervisors I’ve had don’t like the meeting either. Not to conduct with their direct reports, and not to be on the receiving end from their own supervisors. It’s a difficult conversation with no benefits for the employee, the supervisor, or even the business as a whole. It always ends with both parties unsatisfied. It bares saying again: something that could be an opportunity for improvement actually ends up degrading the relationship.

I believe it doesn’t have to be this way. We can do much better.

For starters, we need to disconnect pay raises from performance reviews. How you perform personally should not impact your salary. This is assuming that you’re actually fit for the role and doing a reasonable job. If not, then this meeting should be used to discuss career opportunities that fit you better; either inside or outside your current company. The fact that you can only score between 6 and 8 is actually already confirmation that the scoring system takes into account that you’re at the position you’re suitable for, so not much actually changes here.

So, assuming you’re doing a good job, then you’re adding something of value to the business you’re working at. Together with all the other people who work there the business is hopefully making a profit. The keyword here is together. No business can survive on its own; no single employee makes all the difference. If the business does well, then everyone should benefit equally because everyone who does a reasonable job contributed what was necessary to make the business successful.

Now, if you think you add disproportionally more than your colleagues, then you’re either right or delusional. If you’re right, go search for another business to work for; you’re on a sinking ship. In all other cases: exercise some humility and realize that the sales person can’t sell without the product person building it, the IT person supporting it, and everyone else doing their part as well.

Because everyone should be roughly equal in contribution raises should not go to the ones with the most bargaining power, or the best relationship with the boss, or whatever other arbitrary statistic that is currently used in performance reviews. Instead, each person should get the same relative raise at the end of the year. I’d suggest basing it on the business performance of that year. Say, 20% of profits will go to raises for the next year. You can probably think of your own system that fits your situation best.

This way you won’t have to negotiate raises during performance reviews. Instead, you can talk about what actually matters: improving performance. Discussing what the next step is for you and how that fits with the goals of the business.

One final note I want to leave you with is that this works even better if everyone with the same job is paid the same salary. This eliminates all salary negotiations entirely. Everyone in the same role gets the same salary, period. If you want more money, then you’ll have to negotiate about a position change instead. This is a much better conversation to have both from the employee and from the employer perspective. You’ll be talking about possibilities and ambitions instead of limitations. You’ll come out of it with a clear set of goals: get experience, training, or whatever, and the position will be yours in X amount of time, assuming the position is available.

So, instead of talking about how my scores should be higher, I instead want to be talking about what my ambitions are in the coming year and what I can do to be more valuable to the business. Not haggle about some arbitrary number that sort of represents how much of a raise the business is willing to give me.