Numerical vs narrative performance reviews: Which one is better for business? A new report found that employees share a preference for narrative performance reviews, as many of them are more receptive to feedback that comes with an explanation.
There are many ways to conduct performance reviews, and each business adopts its own way of evaluating employees. Some conduct reviews solely when an employee wraps up another year at the organization, and the matter of pay and promotion is brought up for discussion. Other businesses have annual or biannual review procedures where an employee’s progress is assessed.
Businesses have their own reasons for choosing a specific method to run their operations, however, employee receptiveness to these reviews is rarely questioned. To set matters straight, a new academic study looked into employee preferences and found that narrative reviews offer more benefits than a strictly numerical assessment.
When presented with the option of numerical vs narrative performance reviews, employees find the latter to be the fairest standard of evaluation. (Image: Pexels)
Employees Prefer Narrative Performance Reviews, and They May Just Be More Beneficial for Your Business
Numerical performance reviews are often more straightforward and clinical, allowing managers to assign an employee ratings on their performance on various pre-determined metrics. It doesn’t require complex language or elaborate explanations of the employee’s performance, other than, perhaps, a comment or two at the end of the assessment.
Narrative-based performance reviews, on the other hand, call for more detailed insights into the employee’s strengths, weaknesses, achievements, and errors. They require managers to dig into the employee’s work to leave them with a more insightful summary of their performance overall.
Employers tend to prefer numerical performance reviews, but when it comes to employees, they seem to prefer narrative reviews. A team of researchers from Cornell University recently released a paper on Employee Responses to Numerical vs. Narrative Performance Feedback, which was published in the Academy of Management Discoveries.
The performance appraisal research compared responses to feedback that was provided either through a numerical review, a narrative review, or a combination of both methods. The results showed that employees preferred narrative reviews over the other options, perceiving greater fairness with this particular format.
Do Narrative Reviews Offer the Fairest Performance Assessments?
Employees believe that narrative reviews rank higher in fairness, giving them a more insightful report on how their employers view their performance. This makes sense from the employee perspective, as it turns away from numerical signifiers that may not convey the full picture, and instead relies on hard evidence in the form of stories and examples. Narrative reviews also take more work to construct and can convey intentionality and active thought behind the assessment.
The research on performance appraisals also found that employees can gain a clearer understanding of the feedback and how they should proceed next via narrative recollections. Employees also find themselves more motivated to follow through on presented feedback, making it a more beneficial process overall.
Interestingly, the study did find that when the review is overwhelmingly positive, employees are equally satisfied to receive it in numerical form as they are in narrative form. The high numbers can be an encouraging sight to behold, making it much easier to see the feedback as nothing but fair.
Should Employers Abandon Numerical Reviews In Favor of Narrative Feedback?
Employees may prefer narrative reviews, but most organizations elect numerical assessments for multiple reasons. Not only are they easier to construct and standardize, but they also create an objective and comparable record of an employee’s performance. When considering improvements from one year to the next, numerical performance reviews provide a clear representation of the changes witnessed in the employee. This system also makes it easier to justify promotions or select between evenly matched candidates on the basis of key criteria.
However, these systems are limited in their approach and not always the fairest performance reviews for the employee as an individual. They provide limited actionable data and prove to be disheartening for everyone except the top performers. In order to make these performance reviews more useful to both employers and employees, merging the two systems may offer satisfactory results. Alternatively, the two methods could be used based on the situation, with one being standard practice while the other is put into action when a specific situation calls for it.
The strategy of a combined evaluation may not result in as much enthusiasm from employees, however, it does offer the best of both worlds. For this to be a manageable strategy, employers and HR teams must ensure that managers are trained on how to provide descriptive, qualitative feedback, as this task may prove too challenging for some. When used together, employers themselves might find the performance review process to be more rewarding, resulting in a comprehensive estimation of each employee’s tenure at the organization.
Do you agree that narrative performance reviews are the fairest form of evaluation? Share your thoughts with us. Subscribe to The HR Digest for more insights on workplace trends, layoffs, and what to expect with the advent of AI.
