Book Review: Rudman's Performance Planning and Review

Summary of the Work

Rudman, R. (2003). Performance Planning & Review: Making Employee Appraisals Work. Crows Nest, N.S.W.: Allen & Unwin.

In Performance Planning & Review: Making Employee Appraisals Work, Rudman (2003) presents research and practical guidance on performance management. The material is presented in a way that will benefit corporations, managers, supervisors, students, and others interested in understanding the how and why of performance planning. Rudman suggests that considerable dissatisfaction currently surrounds the performance review process. He criticizes existing systems while arguing that performance reviews can be a tool managers use — without fear or resistance — to encourage employees and teams to perform better. The author also addresses how to plan a performance review, noting the importance of using competency-based reviews for individual assessment versus team-based reviews when evaluating the organization's overall performance.

Author's Main Point

Rudman's central argument is that employee performance review systems are critical to an organization's and an individual's success, and that they must be completed systematically to produce the best outcomes. Rudman (2003) advocates for what he calls "year-round" performance reviews — appraisals integrated into the daily schedules of managers and others, using performance measures to assess the productivity and efficiency of both workers and the organization as a whole.

Main Elements of the Argument

Rudman offers several reasons for conducting integrated and systematic performance reviews throughout the year. First, he argues that few employees currently look forward to "annual performance reviews" with their managers, and that managers equally dislike having to "take on the role of judge" (p. 1). Most people, according to Rudman, regard performance reviews as something "necessary" but also something they simply want to get over and done with. He acknowledges the opposing claim that performance appraisals usually fail because their objectives lack real purpose, but then attempts to offer evidence that the opposite is true. Rudman contends that performance appraisals, when properly planned and conducted, can dramatically improve performance — whether at the organizational, managerial, or individual employee level.

Rudman also suggests that performance appraisals have "always been challenging" for organizations and managers, arguing that the first appraisal began long ago with the hiring of the first employee (pp. 2–4). He does not provide evidence that early performance reviews were poor; rather, he appears to assume they were challenging because many managers today find them so. His stronger point, however, is that many managers simply lack the training needed to conduct performance reviews in a manner that is not cumbersome. Notably, Rudman does acknowledge that his information about pre-existing appraisals reflects his own opinion primarily, rather than textual evidence from other sources.

Rudman then focuses on the many ways performance appraisals can be redesigned to become worthwhile and engaging. He examines terms commonly used in performance reviews, suggesting that words like "planning" and "review" are more meaningful than others because they convey to the user what the appraisal is intended to accomplish (p. 3). He cautions, however, that it is not enough to simply change the "name" and "process"; reviews must be designed to match the "culture" of the organization (p. 4). This means the review format and process should reflect the values, systems, and beliefs most important to both the employer conducting the review and the employee receiving it. Rudman also argues that "performance" has become a "business buzz word" that many people do not fully understand (p. 7). To achieve an effective and well-received review, an organization must first define what "performance" means for its people. He introduces additional terms such as "work activity" and "focused behavior" to help readers understand what performance actually entails (p. 7).

In Chapter 3, Rudman continues to examine why performance systems fail. He describes them as "another add-on human resources technique" that most people do not believe in (p. 22), and suggests that people "in particular dislike the appraisal interview," which is often conducted when managers are already busy "with other plans" (p. 22). Here, however, Rudman again falls short on supporting evidence. He does not demonstrate that performance reviews fail specifically because employees dislike the interview process, and his claim that managers conduct reviews while already overburdened is similarly unsubstantiated.

One of Rudman's more compelling suggestions is that performance discussions should "provide an opportunity for people who work together to step back and summarize the period ended" so they can plan ahead and assess work completed to date (p. 56). This approach allows both managers and employees to focus on accomplishments and areas for improvement over a shorter, more manageable interval, rather than attempting to recall an entire year's worth of performance. In practice, Rudman notes, most managers tend to remember only the last six weeks of an employee's performance (Rudman, 2003).

The author also supports the use of constructive criticism — that is, feedback that identifies specific areas for improvement while guiding the employee toward better performance. In Chapter 6, Rudman again asserts that "end-of-year reviews are unpleasant" for both employees and managers, yet once more relies on assertion rather than documented evidence. Overall, while Rudman offers much useful advice on how to structure and deliver a performance review, he fails to capture the reader's attention early in the book and rarely provides empirical evidence for his claims about widespread dissatisfaction with current review systems.