Every year organisations roll out their refreshed strategies, new KPIs and ambitious goals for the year ahead.

But despite the changing pace in work patterns, technology and workforce requirements, one thing remains stubbornly static: individual performance reviews.

Most of us will recognise how these show up in the workplace: the classic assessment form with boxes to be ticked, rating scales from one to ten, and that awkward blank space for “additional feedback”.

We know these processes are outdated. Researchers have shown for years such systems are backward‑looking, can distort worker behaviour, and overlook collaboration and learning.

We know they are retrospective assessments of narrowly defined individual “quality”. And we know they often fail to reflect the real work people do (versus what they are rewarded for).

But year after year they persist. So why keep using them?

A workplace disconnect

There is substantial research showing why conventional performance appraisal and KPI (key performance indicator) regimes disappoint. Part of the problem is the way they blur the line between pay and performance.

Management scholars have long distinguished performance measurement (for pay and promotion) from performance improvement (for learning and development).

Collapsing both aims into a single annualised process fuels an inherent tension between two quite different activities.

Even more problematic is the timing. Delayed, yearly feedback tends to be outdated and of limited use, missing crucial opportunities for improvement throughout the year.

One widely........

© The Conversation