Christine Mellon is Omnicell's Chief People Officer, aligning ethos, culture and strategy to enhance employee experience and performance.
getty
There’s a long-held belief in most organizations — especially by HR — that every employee wants to be regularly coached and developed. Most companies today have implemented review and development tools designed to continuously coach. It’s a one-size-fits-all approach. But I’ve found this doesn’t always work for everyone, and, in some cases, it’s even a waste of time.
Not everyone wants 'growth.'
To be clear, feedback is not the same as development. Feedback is helpful for employees to know if they are on the right track with their work/results or if they need to course correct. Development is coaching, with the intent of professional growth and often is connected to complex competency models and behavioral assessments. The idea with development is that employees want growth and movement in their careers — maybe in the form of promotions or expanded job responsibilities.
But sometimes, employees with a full career in their profession, who are doing a great job and enjoying it, aren’t angling for ongoing promotions. Some are content in their current role and may just want straight job feedback. Some of those folks only want job feedback when something is wrong. They follow the “no news is good news” performance model. So why force development upon them?
One of the best employees I ever had was a rock star at what she did. She prioritized her family and volunteerism above work but never did less than her best on the job. Our weekly discussions tended to be 10 minutes long, if that, and consisted largely of my asking her what more I could do to ensure her continued success. If she ever needed more input or feedback, she knew to just ask me. That worked perfectly for her.
Make no mistake, employees like my rock star want to do well and want to know if they miss the mark through directional feedback. But they may not need a comprehensive assessment of their core competencies. For some employees, advanced development tools can be transformative — for instance, for a salesperson who wants to think more strategically and become a manager or for a manager who aspires to executive-level leadership but lacks communication skills. Development, on top of feedback for these professionals, helps them grow, making them and the organization better.
Customize the process.
With large employee populations, the tendency to generalize processes is understandable. It’s easier that way. A handful of years ago, there were a lot of studies showing that millennials thrive on constant coaching and feedback. Many of us saw this and thought: "Okay, let’s create systems where everyone gets coached all the time. It’s what employees clearly want." And many working millennials probably have loved it. They’re learning a ton about themselves and shaping up to be fantastic executives and future executives. But assuming every millennial is the same in their desires and needs is wrong-headed. Regardless of generation, people are unique. So why are our processes generic?
Similarly, when competency models emerged many years ago, organizations grabbed hold of these and, before you could say “emotional intelligence” (a staple of competency models), they had built massively complex sets of competencies to measure talent against. Some of these lists of competencies are so lengthy, they're exhausting and end up resembling something of a utopian wish list. I’ve heard managers sigh when confronting the annual process of reviewing employees against these lists. Isn’t the whole point of our talent systems to create a fantastic employee experience and ensure the company delivers on its objectives and financial goals? How did we get off track and make the process itself the objective?
Years ago, I worked at an organization with actual rocket scientists. I remember asking an SVP about an employee I saw come and go every day, head down, shuffling quickly. I was told he was a savant who had worked there for 20 years. I asked who he worked for and the SVP said, “Me, and I just stay out of his way because he knows what he’s doing.” I got to know that head-down worker a bit and can say with certainty that he would have hated sitting through a discussion on competencies. Quite frankly, I think he would have imploded. By not force-feeding him a review or standardized process, this leader knew he was providing the right environment and experience to keep a great employee happy.
Can I make a request?
The whole world is practically bespoke these days. You can order custom shoes, a custom bike — even custom shampoo. People are used to declaring what they want and exactly how they want it. Maybe that’s how we should approach developmental feedback instead of the universal, one-size-fits-all. Some people crave it, while others clearly don’t.
Why not tailor our approach by employee asks and needs? We can cater to those who only look for occasional input on job performance or results, those who crave ongoing coaching and development and those who think they don’t need either but actually do (yes, that’s definitely a category).
Wouldn’t it be a better experience for employees to get the frequency and nature of discussions they actually desire and when they need them, versus a prescribed template and timing that presumes all employees grow or learn, or even receive input the same way?
Maybe the next big shift in talent development and performance systems is ascertaining the unique needs of different employees and then just honoring these. Be OK with less frequent discussions with some employees and more frequent ones with others.
Granted, it will be challenging for managers to ensure they fully understand each employee’s desires and needs when it comes to feedback and development. However, the more we continue to focus on employee experience and engagement, not to mention diversity, the more it makes sense to take employee preferences into consideration and not make the process the point.
Forbes Human Resources Council is an invitation-only organization for HR executives across all industries. Do I qualify?
