traditional<\/strong> view of providing performance feedback, which a majority of firms still practice today. if asked why the traditional practice continues, partners often respond, \u201cthat\u2019s the way we\u2019ve always done it. it ain\u2019t perfect, but we are reasonably satisfied with it.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/p>\n
progressive performance feedback<\/h3>\n continuous feedback trumps annual reviews every day!<\/strong><\/p>\nas veteran observers of how cpa management has evolved over the past 30 years, we\u2019ve been fascinated to see how practices developed years ago are rediscovered. it\u2019s as if these things are being invented for the first time.<\/p>\n
case in point: the norm in virtually all organizations for providing performance feedback is the dreaded annual performance appraisal. yet firms have known for decades that continuous feedback is much more effective than an annual appraisal.<\/p>\n
\ncontinuous feedback<\/strong> means that when a project is completed, the staff are given immediate feedback on their performance instead of making them wait until the annual appraisal session. this way the feedback is fresh and can be used by the staff immediately to improve their performance on their very next project.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\nmarc rosenberg remembers his experience with ernst & young, his first job out of college, like it was yesterday. he was paid a handsome salary at a prestigious firm to be trained on the job for practically his entire first year! every project he worked on \u2013 not most, but all \u2013 ended in a meeting with his supervisor regarding his performance. this of course was in addition to the detailed \u201creview notes\u201d he received every time he turned in work.<\/p>\n
\nan annual performance review<\/strong> is an event that takes place once a year, often combined with the process of giving staff salary increases. in many cases, firms that give annual reviews don\u2019t provide much feedback after jobs. it\u2019s quite possible that the first time staff hear feedback on jobs they completed months ago is during the annual review.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\nfinally, firms are acknowledging that annual reviews suck.<\/strong><\/p>\nrajeev behera wrote in reflektive on november 17, 2015:<\/p>\n
\u201cit\u2019s no secret that annual reviews don\u2019t accomplish what they are intended to do \u2013 develop staff and improve performance and productivity.\u201d<\/p>\n
here are the problems with annual reviews:<\/p>\n
\nneither the staff nor the supervisor looks forward to them. annual reviews create a lot of anxiety for both parties. reviews put staff on the defensive when they receive feedback instead of making them receptive to it.<\/li>\n the formality of annual reviews adds to the anxiety. usually the supervisor gives the staff person a date for the review, often days or weeks in advance. this can make both parties nervous wrecks until the day of the review arrives.<\/li>\n some supervisors convene reviews over lunch, the worst possible place for them. restaurants are crowded, noisy places totally lacking the privacy needed for sensitive conversations. supervisors may hope that the celebratory aspect of meeting in a restaurant will reduce the anxiety, but it only adds to it.<\/li>\n because reviews are done once a year, time will inevitably be spent discussing old jobs as well as recent projects. no one can remember anything about the old jobs, which makes for an anxious and unproductive discussion.<\/li>\n because supervisors know there will be an annual review, they may hold off giving feedback on an ongoing basis. so staff often hear criticism for the first time during the annual appraisal. the review can turn into a \u201chere\u2019s what you\u2019ve done wrong\u201d session.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\noften there is an anxiety-provoking order to the appraisal session: first the \u201cgood things,\u201d followed by the \u201cbad things.\u201d staff can\u2019t really listen to the good things because they\u2019re waiting for the other shoe to drop.<\/p>\n
\nfor quite some time, a pronounced shortage of staff has plagued cpa firms. this has had a negative impact on many aspects of firm operations, including performance feedback. the person giving the review, usually a partner or manager, is fearful that if they give negative feedback, staff will leave the firm. firms reason that they would rather retain an average or mediocre staff person than risk losing them. as a result, there is a tendency to water down the review and skim over anything that could be perceived as negative.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\nthe case for trashing the annual performance review<\/strong><\/p>\nhere is a great article by ed mendlowitz. ed merged his small firm into withum, an east coast cpa firm powerhouse, and has \nsince become a prolific writer and thought leader on practice management. when we see something written by ed, we always look forward to reading it.<\/p>\n
excerpts from \u201cthe art of accounting: annual staff evaluations\u201d in accounting today:<\/p>\n
i have never felt annual staff evaluations are effective. they are forced meetings that lay on complaints for past failures, many of which are not remembered or are vague memories at best. i think these annual meetings are a waste of time. instead, i have been very successful with immediate and periodic evaluations, coupled with regular mentoring sessions.<\/p>\n
when someone does something wrong, i point out right away what it is and how it should have been done. if possible, i discuss what might have been the reason for the incorrect work. i also try to catch people doing something good and tell them \u2013 immediately.<\/p>\n
i also schedule quarterly meetings to discuss performance, growth, satisfaction and goals and what can be done to improve in those areas. i have never liked measuring performance with metrics. it makes it too clinical and doesn\u2019t provide accurate measures.<\/p>\n
a good manager recognizes who the good people are through supervision, oversight, mentoring and interaction. the periodically scheduled mentoring sessions provide time to work on these issues. annual evaluations provide no opportunity for this.<\/p>\n
\u201cthe one minute manager\u201d by blanchard and johnson<\/strong><\/p>\n\u201cthe one minute manager\u201d is an allegory about a bright young man in search of the most effective manager. he hears about the ceo of a company in a nearby town and goes to interview him.<\/p>\n
the ceo tells him that he is a one minute manager \u2013 someone who takes very little time to get very big results from people.<\/p>\n
the ceo says simply, \u201cpeople who feel good about themselves produce good results.\u201d<\/p>\n
the man interviews three people who report to the ceo. he learns the following three secrets:<\/p>\n
\none-minute goal setting. <\/strong>clarify responsibilities and what the subordinate is accountable for. it should take no more than a minute to discuss each goal.<\/li>\none-minute praisings. <\/strong>give crystal-clear feedback to subordinates on how they are doing. tell people up front that you are going to do it. praise people immediately. be specific. shake hands or touch people in a way that makes them feel good about their success. this should take no more than a minute.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\nhelp your people reach their full potential. catch them doing something right!<\/p>\n
\none-minute reprimand. <\/strong>give staff crystal-clear feedback on what they did wrong. be specific. give the feedback in a style that communicates unhappiness with the behavior<\/strong>; don\u2019t attack them personally. touch them in a way that reassures them that you think well of them and that they are valued employees. this should take no more than a minute.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\nother philosophies of \u201cthe one-minute manager\u201d:<\/strong><\/p>\n\nthe best minute you spend is the one invested in people.<\/li>\n feedback is the breakfast of champions.<\/li>\n everyone is a potential winner. some people are disguised as losers. don\u2019t let their appearance fool you.<\/li>\n you will be successful with the one-minute reprimand when you really care about the welfare of the person you are reprimanding.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\nwarning<\/strong><\/p>\nafter reading the last few sections, you may be pumping your fist in the air, shouting, \u201cdown with annual performance appraisals.\u201d<\/p>\n
not so fast. the decision to cut back or eliminate annual reviews must be directly and tenaciously accompanied by two techniques:<\/p>\n
\na major commitment to providing continuous feedback on a routine basis. unless this is done, firms will end up providing little feedback to staff, which would be disastrous.<\/li>\n a transformation of the annual performance review process. for decades, these reviews have been historical, looking back on a year\u2019s worth of performance. but if effective, continuous feedback is provided, the annual review should become a forward-looking<\/strong> process. the firm shares with employees where they stand with the firm and what they have to do to advance.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\nperformance evaluation form<\/h3>\n \n\n\ndate<\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nperson reviewed<\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nsupervisor doing the review<\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nclient<\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nhours worked on the job<\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\naccounting and tax skills<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<\/td>\n excellent<\/td>\n met expectations<\/td>\n needs improvement<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nknowledge of audit and accounting<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nknowledge of tax<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nworkpaper preparation<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nreview techniques<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nwas the person\u2019s work thorough when submitted?<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\noverall comments: ________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
_______________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
general skills<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<\/td>\n excellent<\/td>\n met expectations<\/td>\n needs improvement<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \norganization and planning<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \naccuracy of work<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nability to work independently<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nadhered to the time budget<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nmet deadlines<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \noverall attitude; conscientiousness<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \ncommunication skills<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \neffectiveness as a supervisor<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\noverall comments: ________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
_______________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
what the person needs to work on and needs more experience in:<\/p>\n
__________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
__________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
comments by the employee reviewed:<\/p>\n
__________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
__________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
signature of the person reviewed:___________________________________<\/p>\n
signature of the supervisor: __________________________________________<\/p>\n
traditional performance feedback: the abcs<\/h3>\n throughout the year<\/strong><\/p>\n\nreview the jobs in advance with the staff.<\/li>\n define standards of performance.<\/li>\n clarify expectations:\n\ntechnical<\/li>\n time budget<\/li>\n deadlines<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n provide immediate feedback when each job concludes.<\/li>\n summarize the feedback using the firm\u2019s evaluation form.<\/li>\n build feedback time into the time budget.<\/li>\n the routing sheet should include a checkbox for providing immediate feedback before the job is considered complete.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\npreparing for the annual review session<\/strong><\/p>\n\ngive advance notice of the date of the session. make a specific appointment.<\/li>\n make arrangements for the review session to be convened in a quiet, private room with no interruptions. do not convene review sessions in public places such as restaurants.<\/li>\n the reviewer should not make an appointment for after the review session that could cause the session to end prematurely.<\/li>\n the staff person should complete a self-evaluation form and share it with the reviewer before the review session. says stephen covey (of \u201cseven habits of highly effective people\u201d fame): \u201cit is much more ennobling to the human spirit to let people judge themselves than to judge them.\u201d<\/li>\n the reviewer should obtain feedback from all supervisors who worked with the staff person and should use this feedback in the review session.<\/li>\n reviewers should be trained and effective at conducting performance reviews.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\nthe review session itself<\/strong><\/p>\n\nideally, continuous feedback has been provided to the staff person throughout the year. this makes the annual review session much more effective because instead of dredging up ages-old jobs that no one remembers, the session focuses on the future, where the person stands with the firm and what is needed to advance.<\/li>\n make sure that the message and tone of the session are consistent with the individual\u2019s performance. in particular, don\u2019t let the person walk away from the session feeling \u201ci did well\u201d when, in fact, the firm feels the person is a below-average or marginal performer. this creates a labor law exposure if the person is eventually dismissed despite personnel records indicating acceptable performance.<\/li>\n the annual review session is neither the beginning nor the end to anything. clarify what is expected of the staff person going forward, define the job description, and create formal, written performance goals for the person.<\/li>\n when making general remarks, be prepared to give specific examples.<\/li>\n stick with observed behavior; avoid hearsay.<\/li>\n don\u2019t allow interruptions. conduct the session in a quiet, private environment.<\/li>\n provide enough time; don\u2019t let outside obligations end the session prematurely.<\/li>\n the reviewer should do lots of listening. an appraisal session is not something that happens to<\/strong> an employee, but rather with<\/strong> an employee.<\/li>\nend on an upbeat note.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\nannual performance review form<\/strong><\/p>\nthis is a form that for some reason, firms just love to play with and change frequently. a new person who starts heading up the review function is often under the misguided assumption that the best thing to do, right from the beginning, is to change the review form.<\/p>\n
we considered omitting a sample appraisal form, given our lack of faith in annual performance appraisals. but we weren\u2019t prepared to face the wrath of those expecting such a form in a post about managing staff.<\/p>\n
so the form below is a compendium of some of the better forms we have seen over the years. we always urge firms to keep the form as short as possible. here goes!<\/p>\n
annual performance review form (sample)<\/h3>\n date: ______________<\/p>\n
name of person being reviewed: _____________________________<\/p>\n
name of reviewer: ____________________________________________<\/p>\n
hire date: ________________\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 present position:\u00a0 ________________________<\/p>\n
technical knowledge<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<\/td>\n excellent<\/td>\n met expectations<\/td>\n needs improvement<\/td>\n no basis for judgment<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nauditing and accounting<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \ntax<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nfinancial statement and footnote preparation<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nrecognition and resolution of problem areas<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nunderstanding of the clients\u2019 business<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nworkpaper organization<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \ntechnology skills<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\nengagement management<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<\/td>\n excellent<\/td>\n met expectations<\/td>\n needs improvement<\/td>\n no basis for judgment<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nhas good client relations; gains their acceptance<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nidentifies opportunities for cross-selling<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nmeets time budgets<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nmeets deadlines<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nbills promptly<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nbills aggressively; avoids needless writeoffs<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nplans engagements well<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nexercises good judgment<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nis able to work independently<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\npractice development<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<\/td>\n excellent<\/td>\n met expectations<\/td>\n needs improvement<\/td>\n no basis for judgment<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \npractice development activity<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nbusiness origination<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nkeeping superiors informed<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\nsoft skills<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<\/td>\n excellent<\/td>\n met expectations<\/td>\n needs improvement<\/td>\n no basis for judgment<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nsupervises and trains staff effectively<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nhas good communication skills<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nshows enthusiasm for the work and \nthe job<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nis dependable and reliable<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n \nhas a team orientation<\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n <\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\noverall evaluation:<\/p>\n
[\u00a0 ]\u00a0 excellent\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [\u00a0 ]\u00a0 met expectations\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0 [\u00a0 ]\u00a0 needs improvement<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
suggestions for improvement (be specific): ___________________________<\/p>\n
____________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
what the person should work on during the next year: ______________<\/p>\n
____________________________________________________________________________<\/p>\n
goal setting.<\/strong> attach a sheet with a short number of high-impact goals for the year. all goals should be smart (specific, measurable, attainable, realistic and time-bounded). note: staff should draft their goals before<\/strong> the review session.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"yes, we included a form. but we almost didn\u2019t.<\/strong> \n <\/a> \nby marc rosenberg<\/i> \ncpa firm staff: managing your #1 asset<\/i><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1339,"featured_media":134946,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_relevanssi_hide_post":"","_relevanssi_hide_content":"","_relevanssi_pin_for_all":"","_relevanssi_pin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_unpin_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_keywords":"","_relevanssi_related_include_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_exclude_ids":"","_relevanssi_related_no_append":"","_relevanssi_related_not_related":"","_relevanssi_related_posts":"","_relevanssi_noindex_reason":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[3120,3002,2297],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-134907","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-pro-member-exclusive","category-special","category-staffing"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\na better way to provide performance feedback - 卡塔尔世界杯常规比赛时间<\/title>\n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n \n \n \n \n \n\t \n\t \n\t \n