A number of years ago, I had the unenviable task of telling a communications employee at an annual review that – despite previous years of relatively strong performance ratings with other mangers — that year fell below expectations. I walked through the specifics, then asked for feedback. The employee sat stunned for a moment, then uttered the words, “But (long pause)… I’m a superstar.”
Clearly, there was a big disconnect. I had always taken pride in never having surprises in performance reviews, yet that year I’d failed. I hadn’t fully understood that the change in managers exposed a big consistency gap. This employee’s managers did not apply the same performance standards.
I knew that scenario likely was playing out in annual reviews for communicators all over the world. Picture yourself sitting at a desk at review time and being told by your manager that you’re not that good at something you think you’re great at doing. Or perhaps you’ve been that manager having to “ground” a direct report on the realities of what good work really is all about.
Both scenarios share the same issue and demand the same solution: a lack of performance calibration and a set of clearly defined expectations.
I’m spending lots of time these days talking with communications leaders who often say the same thing: “We know we have weaknesses in some skill sets with our people, but struggle with knowing how to get into the specifics.”
They need common ground – specifics that define the standards of performance that communicators need to follow. And that comes in the form of clearly articulated competencies, tied to specific objectives assigned to individuals and teams. Employees who don’t agree they’ve failed — or failed and want to avoid a repeat – want, and deserve, answers to simple questions that require hard specifics. Why did I fail? What does better/good performance look like? Don’t you think I already do that? What do you mean I need to do it more consistently?
Identifying standards works for everybody. Individuals get better skill sets, managers have more effective conversations and reviews, and the communications function moves forward faster through better team performance.
Identifying and applying those standards is tough work, but pays dividends over the long term – even as new competencies emerge and the bar is raised higher on existing competencies. Consider how social media – once a “specialty” communication activity – now is being folded into jobs across the communications spectrum. Some skill sets for communicators never change, while others are constantly evolving, The point here is that communication managers need to pay attention to them – all the time.
So how do you lay the foundation for managing performance – for yourself and/or your communications function? Here are a few fail-safes to get things humming.
Get specific and get aligned: Every communication and marketing function should have a set of clearly articulated competencies that are endorsed and applied by ALL people managers. That starts the calibration process from the chief communications officer’s desk and drives alignment from senior leaders in the function to entry-level hires. And make sure your HR partners are part of the process and that specific competencies are mapped to specific roles. When it’s personal, it gets a lot more attention.
Apply it through conversation. When it comes to managing performance, words on paper are a great anchor, but their effectiveness is about as helpful as a snow cone in a sauna when it comes to driving change. Managers and their employees should talk at least a couple times yearly about where the employee is on the continuum of growth. Those can be hard conversations, but it’s always better to have them before there’s an opportunity missed or an assignment botched.
Connect competencies to performance wins, and misses. When there are performance problems, chances are they can be tied to specific skills that the employee hasn’t developed. And when the employee hits one out of the park, chances are that competency mastery has emerged. Here again, it’s important either to course correct or reinforce the positives of competency growth by tying the performance to skills that are defined and endorsed by the function.
Whether it’s for annual performance reviews, mid-year check-ins or people processes such as succession planning, communications professionals need to apply the same discipline to managing their performance and career growth as they do to the programs they create and execute. It’s not just about one employee. It’s about entire teams, and it’s about creating a next-generation of superstars that make everybody look good.
