Health Information Technology

The article by Samuel A. Culbert was very interesting to read as I could relate to much of the situations described in it. A performance review is one of the hardest things managers have to do at their jobs. It is hard to keep anyone happy at these reviews, because they are designed to point out the weaknesses of employees and offer solutions for improving. Anytime an individual is criticized it creates unhappiness as most of the individuals are unwilling to change. Are performance reviews really necessary? They are absolutely necessary and they help employees figure out their weaknesses. The problem is that many managers don’t put enough thoughts into this process and by doing so aggravate employees. I have seen many employees leave offices in tears after their performance reviews. A performance review should be molded to a person’s job and personality, for this reason, a standardized performance review cannot be used for all employees. As a person who wants to improve and supports constructive criticism I like performance reviews. I want to know how I am seen by my manager or others and what they think my weaknesses are. As a result I can judge their perception of me and focus on things I think need improvement. I agree with Samuel that performance reviews are one-sided, subjective and do not increase productivity; but no matter how they are they are needed to keep the employees organized, engaged and manageable. If I was designing a performance review for any company it would be an open conversation every month about our weaknesses and improvements that are necessary of all employees. After analyzing the employees’ weaknesses and their necessary improvements I would delegate tasks to those employees that are the best at doing particular tasks, because no one is the best at everything they do. The article is very complicated and it could be argued with many different positions. One thing is certain, performance reviews are a necessity that managers must carry out.