You have reached your maximum number of saved items.<\/p>\n
My annual meeting about my pay and performance took place recently and my manager made it clear they thought I had not earned a pay increase. I disagreed strongly, but I understand that it\u2019s a manager\u2019s job to make these decisions. Instead of explaining this determination, my manager asked me if I agreed with it. I refused to say that I did. I also refused to \u201csell myself\u201d or my performance.<\/p>\n
The decision had clearly already been made. What would be the point of protesting or \u201cadvocating\u201d for myself? And even if I could convince my manager, why is it my job to appraise my own work and present that appraisal as evidence in a review? Isn\u2019t that part of every manager\u2019s job?<\/p>\n
I know where you\u2019re coming from and sympathise with you. Introduced to the concept of performance reviews many years ago, I remember being completely perplexed when so much of the process seemed to encourage self-promotion. It seemed like a bizarre sales exercise where I was the \u201cproduct\u201d. I loathed it.<\/p>\n
But my commiserations don\u2019t really help you. So I asked Dr Connie Zheng, an associate professor in human resource management at the Adelaide University School of Management, for her expert opinion.<\/p>\n
She told me that too often the formal review phase of a reward and recognition system is characterised by a blunt and over-simplistic equation: \u201cYou didn\u2019t perform, so you don\u2019t earn a pay rise.\u201d But she said that genuinely good performance management is far more sophisticated than that, and should never solely rest on a manager\u2019s opinion.<\/p>\n
Dr Zheng explained that even if a pay increase is for some reason out of the question, organisations can reward people in non-financial ways, among them \u201cpromotion opportunities, professional development, flexible work arrangements, additional leave, public recognition, greater autonomy, or mentoring and coaching opportunities\u201d.<\/p>\n
\u201cSimply telling someone they have not earned a pay increase without recognising what they have contributed is unlikely to motivate anyone,\u201d she says. And motivation is a vital component of well-managed performance programmes.<\/p>\n
\u201cA pay rise tells people that their work is valued. Research has consistently shown that pay serves two purposes: it rewards past contributions, but it also motivates future performance. Managers who focus only on judging the past miss an important opportunity to inspire better performance in the future.<\/p>\n
\u201cThat seems to be what happened here. The discussion centred on what the employee supposedly hadn\u2019t achieved, rather than helping them understand what success would look like next year.\u201d<\/p>\n
Now, your manager might respond to such an argument by saying that performance is simply the be-all and end-all. But Zheng says a common misapprehension is that performance relates entirely to numbers.<\/p>\n
\u201cMeasurable outcomes matter. Sales targets, completed projects, customer satisfaction scores, productivity improvements or other agreed KPIs are all legitimate indicators of performance. But they are only half the story,\u201d she says.<\/p>\n
\u201cIncreasingly, organisations also recognise how employees contribute. Do they mentor junior colleagues? Share knowledge? Build strong teams? Help others succeed? Take initiative? Demonstrate integrity?<\/p>\n
\u201cOften called organisational citizenship behaviours, [these] rarely appear on a spreadsheet. However, research consistently shows they make organisations stronger, more innovative and more productive over time.\u201d<\/p>\n
Your manager said you hadn\u2019t earned a pay rise, but they never said exactly why. Zheng asks: were they were assessing only measurable outputs, or were they also recognising your broader contribution to the organisation?<\/p>\n